30. The next solemn sacrifice, in the order of their appointment under the law, is that which is called piney nat, “ zebach shelamim ;” which we render “ peace-offerings,” Lev. iii. 1. It is by translators rendered with more variety than any other word used in this matter: By the Greeks, Ivoia owrnpias, and ris rereris, and aivécews, and reAerw- ozws,— a sacrifice of salvation,” “of expiation,’ “of praise,” “of perfection.” And the Latins have yet more varied in their expres- sion of it: “ Sacrificium pacium,” “ perfectionum,” “ gratulationum,” “salutis,” “retributionum,” “integrorum,” “mundorum,” “ sanctifi- catorum,” “immaculatorum ;’—“ A sacrifice of peace,” “ of perfec- tion,” “of thanksgiving,” “ of safety or salvation,” “ of retribution,” “of them that are clean, or sanctified, or unspotted.” Most of these various expressions also arise from the different significations of the word Dew whence most suppose that nib’ was taken. But others think that it comes from O4°¥, “ peace;” which of late is almost gene- rally received. In general this sacrifice was “ corban,” a gift or offer- ing brought nigh and dedicated unto God; and YS, “a firing,” or an offering by fire; and in specie Nt, “a sacrifice,” from the killing and flaying of the beast that was offered. But it is nowhere said to be 0'¥'12 YIP, or “ most holy,” as being merely expressive of moral duties, in a way accommodated to the present economy of divine worship, see Heb. xiii. 15, but it is usually reckoned amongst them that were so.
SECT. 29-84. ] SACRIFICES OF THE OLD LAW. 541
31. Peace-offerings, as was observed, is the name that hath pre- vailed, though it respected vows of thanksgiving, or for the impetra- tion of mercies: see Lev. vii. 11-18. The reason given by Jarchi for this appellation, namely, “ Because it brought peace unto the world,” is like much of what they say in such cases,—a sound of words without any meaning. Kimchi gives a more sober and rational ac- count of it. “The iY,” saith he, “or ‘burnt-offering,’ was all of it burned, only the skin was the priests’, The NN" and OVS, ‘sin and trespass offerings,’ were burned in part; the breast and shoulder were the priests’, and all the flesh that was not burned, as also the skin. But in this sacrifice, De the fat ascended on the altar, the breast and shoulder were the priests’, the residue of the flesh be- longed unto the offerers, or them that brought it, to eat themselves; and so it was a sacrifice of peace among all parties.” If this reason please not, we may choose one of the other significations of the word, as of “perfections” or “ retributions;” which latter the nature of it inclines unto.
32. The matter of this sacrifice was the same with that of the burnt-offering,—namely, as to beasts of the herd, bullocks or heifers; of the flock, goats, rams, lambs, or kids; of fowls, the same with the former, Lev. i. In the causes of it, it was either a free-will offer- ing for impetration, or from a vow for thanksgiving or retribution. The appointed seasons and occasions of it were,—1l. At the conse- cration of a priest, Exod. xxix.; 2. At the purification of a leper, Lev. xiv.; 3. At the expiration of a Nazaritical vow, Num. vi. 14; 4. At the solemn dedication of the tabernacle and temple, Num. vit, 1 Kings. viii. The manner of its offering is peculiarly described, Ley. iii., and the Jews’ observations about it the reader may see in the Annotations of Ainsworth on the place.
33. Two things were peculiar to this sacrifice:—First, That it is appointed to be offered npya-by Lev. iii. 5, “ And Aaron’s sons shall burn it on the altar nbynnoy ;’ that is, saith the Vulgar Latin, “in holocaustum,” “for a burnt-offering,” as though itself were so, or substituted in the room of the whole burnt-offering. The LXX., in) ra bAoxavrwmara, “ upon the burnt-offerings.” So we, “upon the burnt-sacrifice.” But what is the intendment of that expression is not so evident. The Jews say that the daily burnt-offering is in- tended, which was always first to be offered, and then immediately upon it, or whilst it was yet burning, the peace-offering was to be added thereunto. It is not, indeed, declared whether the ghola men- tioned was the daily burnt-offering or no; most probably it was so: and that, being a sacrifice of atonement, rendered this of thankful- ness acceptable unto God. See Heb. xiii. 15, 16.
34. Secondly, The peculiar parts of the beast in this sacrifice that were to be burned on the altar are enumerated,—namely, the suet
542 SACRIFICES OF THE OLD LAW. [EXERG. XXIV.
and fat of the inwards, the kidneys and their fat, the fat on the flanks, and the caul of the liver, or the midriff Hence it is laid down as a general rule, that “all the fat is the Lorp’s,” Ley. iii. 16; and it is called “a perpetual statute” for all their generations throughout all their dwellings, that they should eat no fat, verse 17. But yet this general precept had a double limitation :—J. That only that fat which was to be offered was excepted from eating. Of the other fat diffused through the rest of the fiesh they might eat. 2. It was only the fat of beasts appointed to be offered in sacrifice that was forbidden, as it is directly expressed, Ley. vii. 25. Of the fat of other clean beasts they might eat. And this offering of the fat seems to denote our serving of God with the best that we have; which yet is not acceptable but by virtue of the blood of Christ, as the fat was to be burned on the burnt-offering, or sacrifice of atonement.