to the doorposts and lintels. First things first.39 The blood and what it signified were of such monumental importance that it was administered prior to any further activity.
The blood applied to the doorposts and lintel was significant for at least five reasons. First, in keeping with the priestly resonances of Exodus 12:6, to make use of an animal’s blood was ordinarily the domain of priests.40 Thus again, the pre-exodus Israel is associated with priesthood as they daub the blood of the Passover lamb onto their doorposts.41 Remarkably, this association emerges long before the official, institutional inauguration of priesthood in Israel.
Second, the application of the blood was symbolic of the faith of those who dwelt inside the homes.42 This aspect of faith is confirmed in Hebrews 11:28: “By faith he [Moses] kept the Passover and sprinkled the blood, so that the Destroyer of the firstborn might not touch them.” By smearing on the blood, the people were proclaiming their trust in the one who had commanded the blood’s application.43
39The phrase “first things first” is taken from Stuart, Exodus, 276, and in this paragraph I am following his argument. He writes, “Note that the blood was smeared on the doorframe even before the Passover meal was eaten; this may be an instance of first things first, that is, that deliverance from death is the primary interest of these instructions and proper memorializing of the exodus the less crucial concern.”
40For example, see Exod 29:16, 20; Lev 1:11, 15; 3:8, 13; 4:25, 30, 34; 16:15, etc.
41Cole, Exodus, 106, finds it remarkable “that there is no association of priests with a rite of a type later strictly limited to them.” However, I am arguing that the pre-exodus Israelites are acting as priests, even if they are not yet formally a “kingdom of priests” (Exod 19:6).
42On this point, see James M. Hamilton, Jr., God’s Glory in Salvation through Judgment: A Biblical Theology (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 95; Bernard L. Ramm, His Way Out: A Fresh Look at Exodus (Glendale, CA: G/L Publications, 1974), 75; and Stuart, Exodus, 276.
43It may be important to point out that both the external, physical action of smearing the blood, and the internal attitude of faith—bound organically and inseparably together—were necessary. John N.
Oswalt, Exodus, in vol. 1 of Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, ed. Philip W. Comfort (Carol Stream, IL:
Tyndale House, 2008), 370-71, comments adroitly on the binding of action with faith in the Old Testament:
“On the one hand, actions done merely because they will have some supposed effect on metaphysical realities are roundly condemned. Examples abound in the Hebrew prophets (e.g. Isa 1:1-15; Hos 5:6-7; Amos 5:18-24). On the other hand, certain attitudes can only be adequately symbolized by certain actions. The person who refused to sacrifice in the way God had directed could hardly say he or she truly was trusting in, believing, and obeying God (Mal 1:6-14). Thus, while it is true that it is the attitude with which the
Exodus 12:22 says that “a bunch of hyssop” was to serve as a kind of paintbrush, as the lamb’s blood was applied to the houses. Here, the third significance of the blood may be discerned. Alexander notes that hyssop “is elsewhere associated with ritual purification (e.g. Lev. 14:4, 6, 49, 51, 52; Num. 19:6, 18).”44 Thus, as the blood was applied to the doorposts and lintels of each Israelite home, it may be an indication that the “purification”
of each home was being effected.
The fourth significance of the lamb’s blood was its apotropaic character. That is to say that the blood on the doorposts and lintel served the function of warding off the Destroyer, or turning him away.45 Those inside the marked homes were protected by the blood (Exod 12:23). On seeing the blood, the Destroyer would be turned away.
Perhaps one of the primary significances of the lamb’s blood is the fifth. The presence of blood on the doorposts and lintel meant that a life had been laid down.46 The blood was an advertisement that a life had been offered up, and for a very specific purpose. The lamb was slain in order that life might continue for the firstborn inside the home.47 The death of the Passover lamb was substitutionary.48 The lamb perished in place of the firstborn sons of Israel. The conclusion of Herbert Wolf seems on target:
Israelites carried out the actions prescribed in [Exod] 12:1-13 that was most important, the nature of the action prescribed was important too.”
44Alexander, From Paradise to the Promised Land, 204. See also Alexander, From Eden to the New Jerusalem, 128; Paul M. Hoskins, “Deliverance from Death by the True Passover Lamb: A Significant Aspect of the Fulfillment of the Passover in the Gospel of John,” Journal of the Evangelical Society 52, no.
2 (June 2009): 288; Sarna, Exploring Exodus, 93; and Vos, Biblical Theology, 120.
45Alexander, From Eden to the New Jerusalem, 128. See also Dozeman, Commentary on Exodus, 267; and Henri Cazelles, “Passover (Easter),” in Encyclopedia of Biblical Theology: The Complete Sacramentum Verbi, ed. Johannes B. Bauer (New York: Crossroad, 1981), 642; contra Sarna, Exploring Exodus, 92, who sees “no apotropaic role” in the lamb’s blood.
46Motyer, The Message of Exodus, 137.
47See Tidball, The Message of the Cross, 56.
48Following Barrick, “Penal Substitution,”149; Mackay, Exodus, 210; and Leon Morris, The
As in the case of the ram that was sacrificed in place of Isaac (cf. Gen. 22:13), the substitutionary nature of the Passover lamb must have been quite clear to the firstborn sons and their families. They knew that if the lamb was not killed, the oldest son would die, a son who had a privileged position in the family.49
Thus, at the very least, the blood of the Passover lambs signified priesthood, faith, purification, protection, and substitution. Yet more symbolism can be found in the instructions for the Passover feast.