fice to that of vicariousness, if these ideas were not harmonious, but discordant! If sacrifice pointed to no substitution, no expiation, but only to self-surrender of
the penitent worshipper, could any mode of speaking be devised more likely to mislead than calling the sacrificial offering a ransom—a Avtpoyv—the most potent symbol
of substitution and exchange.” +
(2.) It would be entirely a work of supererogation for Testi- us to encumber our pages with citations from heathen a authors, proving that they universally practised their sacrificial rites and used their sacrificial language in the sense for which we are contending, since no man living contests the point.{ (3.) It is certainly important to know the opinion of testi-
: Seas : the Jews with respect to their own religious rites. And 5.2
* Dr. J. A. Alexander’s version.
+ Doc. of Atonement, by Rev. J. C. Macdonnell, B.D.—Donnellan Lec- tures for 1857, p. 124,
t ese the curious reader see Outram, De Sacrificiis, D. 1, ch. xxii,
132 THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT.
cHarrer if 1s an indisputable fact that the whole body of ancient | : VIIr. ° ° ° ° ° ° . Jewish theological literature is unanimous in expounding { )
their national sacrifices as vicarious and piacular. Thus Rabbi Levi Ben Gerson, quoted by Outram, says: “The imposition of hands was a tacit declaration on the part of every offerer that he removed his sins from himself and transferred them to that animal.” So also Isaac Ben Arama: ‘‘ Whenever any one sins through ignor- ance, or even with knowledge, he transfers his sins from himself and lays them upon the head of the victim. And this is the design of those confessions,—‘I have sinned, I have been rebellious, I have done perversely,’ —as appears from the confessions of the high priest, pronounced over the bullock sacrificed as his sin-offer- ing on the day of atonement.” Rabbi Moses Ben Nach- — man says: “It was just that his blood should be shed and — that his body should be burned. But the Creator of his mercy accepted this victim from him as his substitute and ransom, that the blood of the animal might be shed instead of his blood ; that is, that the life of the animal might be given for his hfe.’ Rabbi Solomon Jarchi says, referring to Lev. xvi. 11: ‘“ ‘The life of every. living creature is in the blood: wherefore I have given it to make an atonement for your souls :’ life shall come and atone for life.” And Aben Ezra: ‘ ‘The blood makes atonement for the soul ;’ the meaning is, life instead of ne )
Testi- (4.) Outram-+ cites the folowing testimonies from the
ee early Christian Fathers, and declares that as far as his
Fathers. knowledge extended, they were agreed in understanding that the Jewish sacrifices were vicarious and piacular :
“He laid his hands upon the head of the calf; that is,
* These and many more witnesses may be found in Outram, D. 1, chaps. XX.-xXxil.
Tt D.1, chap. ii.
SACRIFICES PIACULAR AND TYPICAL. 133
tye uit, ON, ARRAY OM rey
he lai ins of man is own head : for he is the head...ofthe body, the Ghurch.”* “On the head of the victim the offerer laid his hands, as it were his actions ; for hands are significant of action ; and for these he offered the sacrifice.”+ ‘‘The priests laid their hands, not upon all victims, but on those that were offered for themselves, and especially their sin-offerings ; but upon others the offerers themselves laid their hands. This was a symbol of the substitution of the victim in the room of the offerer for whom it was slain.”+ ‘An attentive observer may learn this very thing, ee from the law respecting sacrifices, which enjoims every one who offers a sacrifice to lay his hands on the head of the victim, and holding it by the head, to bring it to the priest, as offering the animal instead of his own head. Wherefore its language respecting every victim is, ‘ Let the offerer present it before the Lord, and lay his hands upon the head of his offering ;’...... whence it is con- cluded that the lives of the victims were given instead of the lives of the offerers.”§ |
CHAPTER
Ill. It only remains for us, in this third division of sacrifices
our argument, to prove that the sacrifices of the law were typical of the sacrifice of Christ ; that is, that the prin- ciples of vicarious and piacular suffering upon which they proceeded are identical with those upon which, by one sacrifice, for sin, he has for ever perfected them that are sanctified.
“Every true type,’ says Litton, || ‘is necessarily a symbol—that is, it embodies and represents the ideas which find their fulfilment in the antetype; but every symbol is not necessarily a type: a symbol may termi-
* Origen, Homil. ad Levit. 1. + Theodoret, Quest. i., ad Levit. Quest. lxi., ad Exod.
Eusebius, Bishop of Cesarea, Demonstr. Evang., L. i. ¢. x.
Litton’s Bampton Lectures, Lect. iii,
= coo ++
of the law typical of the sacri- fice of. Christ.
CHAPTER VIil.
134 THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT.