Not to speak of sacrifices in general, the sacrifices of the Jews may be referred to four heads: —
(1.) The daily sacrifice of morning and evening, which is instituted Exod. xxix. 38, 39 ; which being omitted, was renewed by Nehemiah, chap. X. 33, and wholly taken away for a long season by Antiochus, according to the prophecy of Daniel, chap. xi. 81. This is i\ie juge sacrificium, typifying Christ's constant presence with his church in the benefit of his death always.
(2.) Voluntary and occasional, v/hich had no prefixed time nor matter; so that they were of such creatures as God had allowed to be sacrificed, they were left to the will of the offerer, according as oc-
OF THE SATISFACTION OF CHRIST. 423
casion and necessity were by providence administered. Now, of these sacrifices there was a peculiar reason, that did not, as far as I can find, belong unto any of the rest. Tlie judicial government of that nation being, as their own historian, Joseplius, calls it, QsozpuTla, and imme- diately in the hand of God, lie appointed these voluntary sacrifices, which were a part of his religious worship, to have a place also in the judicial government of the people; for whereas he had appointed death to be the punishment due to every sin, he allowed that for many sins sacrifice should be offered for the expiating of the guilt contracted in that commonwealth of which himself was the governor. Thus for many sins of ignorance and weakness, and other perversi- ties, sacrifice was offered, and the guilty person died not, according to the general tenor of the law, " Cursed is every one that continueth not in all these things." Hence David, in his great sin of murder and adultery, flees to mere mercy, acknowledging that God had ap- pointed no sacrifice for the expiation of those sins as to the guilt political contracted in that commonwealth, though otherwise no sins nor sinners were excluded from the benefit of sacrifices, Ps. li. 16. This was their political regard ; which they had and could have only on this account, that God was the supreme political governor of that people, their lord and king.
(o.) Sacrifices extraordinary on solemn occasions, which seem some of them to be mixed of the two former kinds, stated and voluntary. Such was Solomon's great sacrifice at the dedication of the temple. These partly answered the sacrifice instituted at the dedication of the altar and tabernacle, partly the free-will offerings which God allowed the people, according to their occasions, and appointed them for them.
(4.) Appointed sacrifices on solemn days; as on the sabbath, new moons, passover, feast of weeks, lesser and greater jubilee, biit espe- cially the solemn anniversary^ sacrifice of expiation, when the high priest entered into the holy place with the blood of the beast sacri- ficed, on the tenth day of the month Tisri. The institution of this sacrifice you have Lev. xvi. throughout. The matter of it was one bullock, and two goats, or kids of goats, verses 3, 5. The manner was this: — [1.] In the entrance, Aaron offered one bullock peculiarly for himself and his house, verse 6. [2.] Lots were cast on the two goats, one to be a sin-offering, the other to be azazel, verses 8, 9. [3.] The bullock and goat being slain, the blood was carried into the holy place. [4.] Azazel, having all the sins of the people confessed over him, was sent into the wilderness to perish, verse 21, [5.] The end of this sacrifice was atonement and cleansing, verse 30. Of the wliole nature, ends, significancy, and use of this sacrifice, as of others, elsewhere; at present I attend only to the thesis proposed.
Now, if perfect atonement and expiation might be expected from any of the sacrifices so instituted by God, certainly it might be from
424 VINDICIiE EVANGELiaE.
this; therefore this doth the apostle choose to instance in. This was the sacrifice offered xar Iviavrov and slg to Birivsx.ss- But these, saith he, could not do it ; the law by them could not do it. And this he proves with two ai-guments: —
1st From the event: Heb. x. 2, 3, "For then would they not have ceased to be offered ? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. But in those sacrifices there was a remembrance again made of sins every year." The words of the second verse are to be read with an interrogation, conclusive in the negative: " Would they not have ceased to have been offered?" that is, certainly they would. And because they did not do so, it is evident from the event that they could not take away sin. In most copies the words are, 'Ets/ av s'ravffavTo irf'OGfipoij.ivai. Those that add the negative particle oDjc put it for oh-xJ^ as it is frequently used.
'2>dly. From the nature of the thing itself: Verse 4, "For it was not possible tliat the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins." The reason in these words is evident and plain, especially that of verse 4. There is a twofold impossibility in the thing: —
(\st^ In regard of impetration. It was impossible they should really atone God, who was provoked. First, the conjunction between the sinner and the sacrificed beast was not such or so near (being only that of possessor and possessed) that really, and beyond representa- tion and type, the blood of the one could satisfy for the sin of the other. Much less, secondly, was there an innate worth of the blood of any beast, though never so innocent, to atone the justice of God, that was offended at sin, Micah vi. 6, 7. Nor, thirdly, was there any will in them for such an undertaking or commutation. The sacrifice was bound with cords to the horns of the altar; Christ went willingly to the sacrifice of himself.