Francis Schaeffer always labors to embolden Christians to be evangelistic towards aspects of society that we would not normally engage, but also does so by posing the question as to why we’re not already taking the love of Christ into those places and to those people. In The God Who Is There, Schaeffer traces the major shift in the thought for modern man through areas such as philsophy, science, and music. He also analyzes how art portrays the hopelessness of man and how he struggles with worldviews that won’t hold any water. In the final paragraph of the chapter on art, I think that his terminology is very poignant with respect to its paradoxical nature.

His words leave a lasting impression insofar as typically art is perceived as beautiful, but often times the implications of what it is meant to portray, or rather communicate, is not very pretty at all. In fact, most of the major artists that he mentions in this chapter all either attempted or succeeded at suicide. On the other hand, Christianity can come across very ugly, which is quite disturbing, especially in light of the fact that the gospel is the most glorious and magnificent masterpiece in all the universe. And what Schaeffer means here by describing it as “ugly” is not in reference to the world’s reception of the offense of the cross. It is the failure of Christians to be proper ambassadors of Christ to a lost and dying world in desperate need of reconciliation. A good question to ask yourself is do you treat the unbelieving world with a type of Christian snobbery, hording the gospel to yourself, or do you carry in your body a broken spirit for the people in this world who are searching for meaning in this life, but keep coming up empty and without a lasting hope?

Here’s the final paragraph to Schaeffer’s chapter on art in The God Who Is There. It is very sobering:

These paintings, these poems, and these demonstrations which we have been talking about are the expression of men who are struggling with their appalling lostness. Dare we laugh at such things? Dare we feel superior when we view their tortured expressions in their art? Christians should stop laughing and take such men seriously. Then we shall have the right to speak again to our generation. These men are dying while they live; yet where is our compassion for them? There is nothing more ugly than a Christian orthodoxy without understanding or without compassion (54).

As I noted in my introductory post for this series, I’m not going to be interacting highly with some of the primary and secondary sources on the theological significance of beauty. I’m mainly concerned with sustaining a right appropriation of the use of Scripture and the exercise of its authority. Since I have always tried to pursue a sound understanding of the relationship between Christ and culture, which by the way is a relationship that does in fact exist, I have inevitably encountered numerous discussions on the role of art in the world for both Christians and non-Christians. Moreover, when the issue of art arises, it is often followed by the reference of Exodus 28:2-3 as biblical support for making “something”–in this case “holy garments”–simply for the sake of beauty. However, after sifting through this text for a prolonged time and at an indepth level, I’ve come to be wary of feeling completely comfortable in citing this verse as a proof-text thereby justifying any kind of art that suceeds in exubing some sort of “beautiful” quality. It seems that there may be a possiblity for misreading the text which would allow it to become authoritative and permissive in the artistic community no more than it would be incorrect to assume that God’s mandate for his people to wear ”holy garments” still stands. However, I do believe that Ex 28:2-3 has some major biblical-theological contributions with respect to its application in the art world; we just need to narrow those down some before we take off slinging this text around anytime someone opposes the importance and necessity for Christians to appreciate and be engaged in the arts.

So what does God mean when he tells Moses to have Aaron’s priestly garments made “for glory and beauty”? Well, the best way to determine the meaning of this phrase is by examining the purpose of the garments themselves. As we will see later in Ex 28:3, the “holy garments” were a necessary prerequisite for Aaron to be a priest before God. They had a role in his consecration, preparing him to enter into the Lord’s service in the tabernacle on behalf of the people of Israel. Aaron’s entire wardrobe was specifically articulated by God throughout the rest of Ex 28, culminating in his instruction for adorning his sons with “sashes and caps” also to be made “for glory and beauty” (Ex 28:40).

The extravagance of their garments was intended to symbolize a number of different things, but most obviously, the vestments pointed towards the glory and beauty of God. Yet, this was accomplished through observing the many layers in which God’s design of both the tabernacle and the priest’s robes alluded not merely to God himself, but also to his creative handiwork. Thus, just as the OT tabernacle was symbolic of both the earth, the heavens (i.e. stars, cosmic bodies), and the invisible heavenly dwelling-place of God, so also the priest’s robes were symbolic of these things since they were crafted with much the same colors and stones as the tabernacle itself. Furthermore, the tabernacle would have caused the Israelites to be reminiscent of a pre-Fall time where the entire universe was God’s cosmic temple. For example, just as the tabernacle consisted of three main courts, so also creation in a pre-Fall existence would have included earth, the heavens, and then the Garden of Eden, an inner sanctuary (e.g. the Holy of Holies). Likewise, in a very intricate fashion, the priestly garments were designed in three-layered parts which corresponded to the blueprint of the tabernacle.

There is so much material to mine with respect to the purpose and meaning behind the tabernacle, and more specifically in our discussion, the Aaronic vestments; however, to avoid the bottomless pit which I feel I’m about to step into, I want to transition back into glancing at the theological implications of the priest’s robes and their relationship to beauty and how we should look at applying this verse today.

First, we must pay careful attention in the text to who the speaker is, namely, God. It is God who says that the garments are to be “for glory and beauty”. In fact, not only does he command Moses to have these vestments made in that manner, but he even equips certain people with the level of skill and craftmanship needed to accurately and satisfactorily perform this duty (Ex 28:3; see also Ex 31 & 38). God had a special purpose in mind when he declared that Aaron’s “holy garment” were to be so majestic in appearance. As mentioned above, the most obvious reason was for them to reflect God’s own glory and beauty insofar as the priesthood was ministering in God’s service. By bearing upon themselves “holy garments” made for the purpose of “glory and beauty” that were handcrafted by those whom God had filled with a “spirit of skill,” the Aaronic priesthood, especially the glorious vestments of the chief priest, appear to be “an embodiment, enactment, and representative of the purity and holiness of Yahweh’s self  (Brueggeman, Theology of the OT, 665).”

Therefore, the creation of “holy garments” in Ex 28:2 “for glory and beauty” had to do with explicit symbolism ordained by God that would clothe his chosen priesthood with a wardrobe which served not only as a reminder for his people of his creation of the cosmos, but even more so, it would represent the holiness and glory of the God whom they were serving and worshiping. There is much more to say on this part of the robe’s theological significance, but bringing the discussion back to how we should apply the verse in today’s world, I think we should be careful using it as a proof-text for any kind of art that is beautiful, even though it is done by someone who bears the imago dei.

In this case, the artwork involved in making the garments “for glory and beauty” was not just beauty for beauty’s sake; but instead, as designated by God, the extravagant nature of the priestly vestments were meant to intentionally serve the Hebrews in pointing them in particular to the very nature and wonder of the God who was going to dwell among them. Aaron’s “holy garments” had a very unique and divinely-appointed purpose. Thus, it is hard for me to enlist Ex 28:2-3 in an apologetic discussion on art in general. A painting or song lyric that is beautiful to the eyes or ears, yet fails to explicitly point the observer or listener to the God from whom all of its admirable qualites are derived is not the same type of creative activity that God tells Moses to oversee in Exodus 28.

On the other hand, Ex 28:2-3 does not in any way speak out against art in general or Christian art per se insofar as the priest’s garments were also meant to reflect the beauty of God’s creation. This point, whether knowingly or not, testifies to the reality of a Creator. Furthermore, this is so often clearly manifested when a person made in the image of God applies his or her own skill to a certain task whether it be art proper (e.g. paintings, sculptures, music), or say when my friend Bret does something really incredible with welding, or maybe when my friend Will, who is a landscaper, turns a regular yard into a something that looks like it ought to have a permanent place in a botanical garden. But, all in all, if a Christian artist wants to use Ex 28:2-3 as biblical support for his creative activity, then the fruit of his labors ought to, in a very intentional and specific manner, be constructed in order to point the onlookers not just to an unknown Designer or abstract ultimate reality, but rather to the God of the Bible. I would even go so far as to say that if one wanted to rightly set oneself within the artistic framework of Ex 28:2, the art should be clearly gospel-centered, but that’s for another post.

As the issue of Christ and culture becomes a more prominent topic at hand for the Christian church to discuss and to address, one avenue of interest that seems to stand out among most others is the purpose, or rather, the place of art in the believer’s life, or more so, the Christian community. I’d like to use the word ”art” in these forthcoming posts to designate a broad spectrum of artistic endeavors ranging from its traditional understanding, namely, paintings, sculptures, and the like, all the way to music and other things that are conducive to being constructed or performed in a creative, original, and artistic manner. This definition, of course, includes practices performed by means of both hobbies (e.g. gardening) and work (e.g. landscaper).

If you begin to read some of the standard works on the relationship between art and the Christian, especially some of the newer ones, you won’t have to read too far before you come across the referencing of Exodus 28:2. In it, God tells Moses, “And you shall make holy garments for Aaron your brother, for glory and beauty.” I remember when I first came to know this verse; I thought I had found the sledge-hammer text for God’s unapologetic endorsement of art. Recently, when given the chance to write an exegetical paper for my Hebrew class, I immediately chose this passage to investigate so that I could have an excuse to evaluate whether or not Ex 28:2 was being used improperly as a proof-text or if the proponents of art were justified in laying claim to it. In a few short posts, I want to set forth some of the things that I learned in looking closely at this text with regard to the place and purpose of art and the believer’s role in supporting it. In addition, I want to shed more light on Ex 28:2 and its biblical-theological context, which is actually quite overwhelming. My intention is to primarily interact with the biblical text and not necessarily with all of the many Christian books that speak on this issue. I’m still fairly “under-read” in this area and would not like to lead you all into thinking otherwise.

Though this topic may seem somewhat insignificant in the grand scope of things, its place in Exodus and the Tabernacle narrative is very important and essential to God’s plan to dwell among his people; and therefore, how we understand God’s mandate for Aaron’s garments to be made “for glory and beauty” has a profound effect on how we view many things in relation to God such as creation, worship, mankind, and what man himself “creates.”

Click here to view my paper on Exodus 28:2-3. It mainly interacts with the Hebrew and syntactical matters. Only towards the end do I delve into some of the theological themes, but it is very brief and just gives a taste of what is capable of being mined in this passage.