Page images
PDF
EPUB

week is that of sacrificial purgation. This very natural presumption is confirmed by the express language of 2 Chron. vii. 9: "they kept the dedication of the altar seven days, and the feast seven days."

The day of atonement, it is true, is not mentioned by Ezekiel, but his silence does not prove that he knew nothing of it. For he likewise makes no allusion to the feast of weeks, which belonged even to the first legislation (Ex. xxiii. 16; xxxiv. 22), and this though he speaks of passover and tabernacles (Ezek. xlv. 21, 25). He does not allude to the daily evening sacrifice (1 Kings xviii. 29, 36; 2 Kings xvi. 15; see Ezek. xlvi. 13 ff); nor to the high-priest (2 Kings xii. 7, 10; xxii. 4; xxiii. 4); nor to the priestly dues enjoined in Deut. xviii. 3; see xliv. 28 ff. It is also true that no mention is made of its observance in the Old Testament history, nor in fact for a long time after. The earliest allusion1 to it is by Josephus (Ant. xiv. 16. 4), who tells us that Herod took Jerusalem (B.C. 37) on the solemnity of the fast, as Pompey had done twenty-seven years before. The feast of weeks is spoken of but once between Moses and the exile (1 Kin. ix. 25; 2 Chron. viii. 13). The Sabbatical year is not mentioned until the period of the Maccabees (1 Macc. vi. 53). The fast of the seventh month, alluded to by Zechariah, in commemoration of the murder of Gedaliah (2 Kin. xxv. 25), was entirely distinct from the annual humiliation for sin. The Professor seems to think that the day of atonement was not instituted for some years after the Levitical law was brought out by Ezra. This will involve him in fresh difficulties; for, as Delitzsch remarks, it will be necessary to exclude from Ezra's law not only Lev. xvi., where the services of the day are described in detail, but also all the allusions to it elsewhere, as Ex. xxx. 10, which speaks of one annual atonement; Lev. xxiii. 26-32; xxv. 9; Num. xviii. 7, which speaks of a priestly duty within the veil; Num. xxix. 7-11; and all passages containing the name given to the lid of the ark in consequence of the expiation effected there, "the mercy-seat;" and it would be very extraordinary, if the ritual of the day of atonement, in which the mercy-seat

1 It is perhaps referred to, though this is not certain, in Josephus, Ant. xiii. 10. 3, where the high-priest Hyrcanus is spoken of as alone in the temple, offering incense.

Pentateuch still on its old foundations.

369

occupies so conspicuous a place, dated from a time when the ark and mercy-seat had ceased to exist.

It is a significant fact also that Ezekiel's Torah was revealed to him (xl. 1)" in the beginning of the year, in the tenth day of the month;" if the tenth of Tisri, the first of the civil year, be meant, this was the day of atonement, and likewise the day on which the trumpet was blown to usher in the year of jubilee. The combination of this day with the release of prisoners is clearly shown by Isa. lviii. 6, and that the prophet was acquainted with the law (Lev. xxv. 8-10) is shown by his allusion to its terms (Isa. lxi. 1 ff.). Ezekiel was acquainted with the year of jubilee, and speaks of it as well known, which consequently involves a knowledge of the day of atonement, with which it began.

We have now completed our task. And as we lay down our pen, may we not say of this latest critical attempt to roll the Pentateuch off its old foundations, that it has not achieved success? It has enveloped Mount Blanc in a cloud of mist, and proclaimed that its giant cliffs had for ever disappeared. But, lo! the mist blows away, and the everlasting hills are still in place.

W. HENRY GREEN.

ART. VI.-The Sacrificial Aspect of Christ's Death.' THE question, "How shall man be just with God?" which perplexed the upright Job in that dim era before Abraham appeared as the crowning example of the faith which is imputed for righteousness, has been the chief agitating theme of all the ages. Around it have circled controversies, and out of it have grown systems, which are familiar to every reader of theology. During considerable periods there have seemed to be settlements of the cardinal points, and substantial agreement upon what is termed "the Catholic Doctrine." Again the matter would be opened and a revision demanded, followed by a general acquiescence, with the old views substantially re-established, modified by such changes of phase or

1 From the New Englander.

phrase as progressive culture make inevitable upon every subject of knowledge, for amid all the agitations the Author and Giver of salvation has maintained His own unswerving position, and imparted His unchanging truth. Notwithstanding occasional aberrations of sects or schools, and individual rejections ("wandering stars for whom the blackness of darkness is reserved"), none not avowedly atheistic fail to claim recognition in the grand chorus of ascription to Him who should be always and everywhere "called Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins."

Within the present generation there has occurred one of these re-openings of the subject and demands for revision of specific statement, and an opportunity offers for serious discussion among those who are in essentials united, in non-essentials charitable. The movement is just now stirring the air of churches and pulpits and divinity schools, producing increasing freshness of thought and utterance in many quarters, or, as some fear, circulating malarious influence. Out of it have already come such books as those of Bushnell and Smeaton and Dale, Maurice and Robertson, reminding students of the old works of Anselm and Abelard, Aquinas and Scotus.

In attempting a slight contribution to the discussion, the title of this article will indicate the particular line pursued. The death of Christ had, undeniably, a sacrificial aspect. Was that real or only apparent? Did He, in His death, actually offer Himself as a sacrifice in any proper sense? If so, in what sense? and what place did His sacrifice occupy in the work of redemption which His earthly career fulfilled?

In seeking answers to these questions the method proposed is not the rationalistic, constructing out of the supposed requirements of fallen human nature an a priori scheme; nor even out of the elements of revelation a theory which reason will accept as satisfying all its inquiries; but rather, after the manner and in the spirit of the ancient motto of the schoolmen, "Faith seeking Knowledge," the aim will be to collate a few of the easily verified facts made known by revelation and history, and from them to formulate the doctrine which proves to be most intelligible to reason and most acceptable to conscience.

I. The first of these is the fact that God has, from the beginning, put into men's minds, and made universal, the idea of

Earliest recorded sacrifice.

371

propitiation by sacrifice, and caused it to be the basis of their faith of acceptance with Him. Very near the opening of history, under the first intimation of man's effort toward peace with Him after the fall, we encounter this. The two sons of Adam are represented at their altars with their offerings; one is trustful, obedient, and accepted; the other unbelieving, disobedient, and condemned. In the Epistle to the Hebrews the key to their conduct and its result is given. By that faith which is "assurance of things hoped for, a conviction (or proving) of things not seen," which to rationalism is blindness, but which "wrought with his works and by works was made perfect," faith in God's requirement and promise, Abel made the acceptable offering to which God had respect. It cannot, indeed, be claimed as entirely clear, that this was a sin-offering rather than a thank-offering; but, judged in the light of similar transactions under positive appointment, the inference that it was so is legitimate. The language of God to Cain, which is often quoted as verifying the supposition, is not so interpreted by the best expositors. "If thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door"; i.e. not a sin-offering is at hand-a lamb by whose offering, like that of Abel, thou mayest yet be forgiven and reinstated, but rather "sin," the power of evil, personified as a malignant enemy, "croucheth close to thee." It is a warning against impenitence, not an offer to faith. If thou persistest impenitently in ill-doing, sin will permanently master thee. "His desire is unto thee now, but thou shouldst subdue him and rule over him." If, thus warned and encouraged, Cain had subdued the evil which threatened to control his life, and turned with penitence to God, he would surely have offered a sacrifice like in substance, as well as in spirit, to that of Abel, and God would have had equal respect unto it. But however we may interpret these words, the supposition in regard to the accepted offering, that it was designed as a sacrifice of propitiation, stands at least in strong probability. It is the first recorded in an uninterrupted series through the ages. If so, whence came the conception and the practice in this original family of earth, whose then living head had been in closest communion with the Creator? The notion that it was merely the self-moved and unwarranted act of the natural mind feeling after God and peace, or a fanciful suggestion from the

observed tendency of inanimate objects (as "it was the way of the smoke to go heavenward, giving them a natural hint to make it the vehicle of religion-sending up their cloud of homage by offering in fire upon their altars "), is a very inadequate explanation. Even if in any degree it accounts for that part of the offering which expended itself in the burning, what bearing has it upon the bloody part of their chief sacrificial transactions upon which, though not mentioned in this first instance, yet in all the continued history of religion such supreme stress was laid? Moreover, upon the assumption that it was a self-prompted, natural movement of the human mind, if it proves to be a movement from the beginning and practically uniform, it must be classed among those intuitive moral conceptions which are the developments of the Divine Creator's mind, wrought into the constitution of the creature; essentially a revelation, or equivalent to it. "A law unto themselves," because "the work of the law written in their hearts." So unavoidable is this judgment, that Dr. Bushnell (though with an object contrary to that intended in this Article) declares, "Sacrifices are not the mere spontaneous contrivances of men, but contrivings impelled and guided by God; just as truly appointed by Him as if ordered by some vocal utterance from heaven."

Passing, however, beyond the first recorded case, we come to another still clearer. We find Noah coming forth from the ark to his act of sacrifice. There the distinction between clean and unclean animals is already recognised, typical of the cleansing from sin and consequent holiness required in the worshipper, and equally of the demand for such offerings as God would accept for the purpose of securing from Him such cleansing. The distinction was more fully developed afterward, when even the allowance of the things which they might eat suggested, by its strictness, to every Israelite their moral relations to Him, and that there could be no sound daily living, as well as no spiritual life, until peace was established with Him. No happiness nor holiness without pardon first. So, as Noah, with whatever foretokenings of "the law of the beasts, to make a difference between the clean and the unclean," was given to the antediluvian world, approached the altar, he took with him such as "a young calf for a sin-offering, and a kid of the goats

« PreviousContinue »