seen above, these sacrifices secured the remission of the omar penalties denounced by the Jewish Theocratic State- ™ Church law upon all sins, whether moral or simply cere- monial, except such as were committed “with an high hand.” As far as this ceremonial State-Church penalty was concerned, these sacrifices effected a real expiation. But as far as the penalty attaching to the moral law, absolutely considered, was concerned, they were of course only symbolical of the principles upon which alone remission could be obtained, and hence typical of the one all-perfect sacrifice of Christ. ‘It is not pos- sible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins” (Heb. x. 4); that is, sin viewed absolutely. But they did avail to “sanctify to the purifying of the flesh ” (Heb. ix. 13). A member of the theocratic com- munity broke the law, and incurred the penalty at once of the ceremonial and of the moral law. He presents a faultless victim, lays his hands upon its head, confesses his sins, slays it, giving life for life; and then the penalty is remitted. That is, the ceremonial penalty is remitted, upso facto, upon the completion of a regular sacrifice; and the penalty of the moral law is remitted, if the offerer, spiritually discerning the evangelical principles of which these sacrifices were the symbols, acted faith, however darkly, upon the promise of God relating to that Sacri- fice of which they were the types. The sacrifice of a dumb animal was fully sufficient, when divinely appointed, to satisfy for the infringement of the law, when considered simply in its character as a ceremonial ; while the law, viewed as an expression of absolute righteousness, can evidently be satisfied with nothing else than either the full execution of the penalty in the person of the sinner, or a full equivalent therefor in the person of an adequate substitute.*
* See Candlish on the Atonement, part i., chaps. vy. and vi.
CHAPTER VIIt.
Testi- mony of Prophets.
130 THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT.
The word habitually used to define the exact nature of the process through which the Mosaic sacrifices attained to their constant effect, forgiveness, is 753, to cover, to make expiation, to atone (Lev. iv. 20, 26, 30, 91, 35; v. 6, 10, 13, 18, &c.,.&c.). All admit that the Greek word (Adoxer Oa, and its cognates fAacmos and iNacrnpiov, have universally, and from time immemorial, the sense, when construed with ‘‘God,” of propitiation; and when construed with “sin,” of ewpiation in the strict sense. And yet it is a fact that the authors of the Septuagint, three hundred years before Christ, while the Jewish and ethnic sacrifices were still in constant use, habitually translated the Hebrew -p> by the Greek (AacKer Oa : and the»-nnaa (mercy-seat) they translate (AaorHy y, propitiatorium, or seat.of expiation.and..propitiation. The Septuagint was the version of the Old Testament habitually quoted by Christ and his apostles. Instead of ever hinting that the inspired Hebrew text was mis- represented by the Greek words used as equivalent, they adopt the same words themselves when speaking of the sacrifice of Christ. Christ is said to have been made a faithful high priest ‘‘to make expiation for the sins of the people,”—e’s to iAarkecPat Tas auaptias Tov aod (Heb. it. 17. See also Rom. iii. 25; 1 John i. 2, and iv. 10.) See below, chapter twelve.
5. In confirmation of the truth of this interpretation of the Jewish sacrifices, we can cite the unanimous testi- mony of (1) the inspired prophets and apostles, and (2) the ancient heathen, (3) Jews, and (4) Christian writers. In opposition to this ancient external testimony to the meaning of sacrifices, the school of Bahr, Maurice, Bushnell, Young, &c., has not a single witness to cite.
~ -(1.) As to the testimony of the prophets to the piacu- lar character of the Mosaic sacrifices, I cite the witness of Isaiah liii. 4, 6, 10, &. Speaking of the Messiah,
SACRIFICES PIACULAR AND TYPICAL. 131
the prophet says, God '“‘made his soul an offering for cuartr sin,’ —a sin-offering; and to this end “laid on him the “™ vmquity of us all :” and hence he was punished in our stead ; ‘he was wounded for our transgressions .. . and
the punishment of our peace was wpon him,”* As to the apostolic testimony, in part, compare 1 Cor. v. 7, where Christ is said to be “sacrificed for us,” and 1 Pet. i.
18, 19, where it is said that we are redeemed with the pre- cious blood of Christ, ‘as of a lamb without blemish and without spot,” with Matt. xx. 28, “The Son of man came
to give his life a ransom for many.” ‘The prominent
idea of ransom is that of payment—of vicarious substi- tution—of one thing standing in place of another. No fioure can so fully convey this idea as one drawn from purchases with money. What a source of misconception, then, would it have been thus to yoke the idea of sacri-