SACRIFICE
SACRIFICE
of the word of God, the second in P^-ayer- ^ncl
rnce'from threatened evil and possession of coveted ance •'""' formula roufh y expresses the end ot °°i- nC in vkw of tie ancient and commonly ^^Xd^o^ition oTsalrlhce as the staple reli^^^^^^ Xervan^e. it follows that commumonwah a D^ v •„ , ..tSfii thp security involved m sucn com Son? must al^ote ti.e end generaUy contem- plated in sacrificial practice.
used in the o^a.. ^no,^ ^ '^I'^^l^^'' ^°tf ^"fl^^^Si ordinate class of cereal offermss (Lv -). ^ne fc^"""- .,^^
tion oj -cnflce^...J. ^ /-^^(^Crn/m inverted order. 'AT l").' ?^Vldea S"aUo Lpre-ed by enu-nemUng tour
varieties (ll>»). ,„„„^<..».i. of freauent occurrence, being
in'er^LS^ ^^'•^"^'^S^^^^Sf T^^JS^
tvpe Exceptionally RV retains it as translation of in (PsU8 ). a r'of nn3-(141=). in NT it renders fo... and 8^.., and >s some- ttaes dlSn^s.4d from the • offering' a« the bloody from th. unbloody.
ii The Obigin of SACRIFICE.-The controversies in vhich this subject has been so fru tful have nassed throu-h tv o phases. In the earher period ?hf keenly debated issue was whether the institu- t on was o'^: Divine appointment, or merely devised Tmras an instruii^ent for satisfy in ^^
tion is that it is framed inth 7'"^;''!,,'?;"the questionable
piacularsacriflces and furt;e^ that. ^
assumption that tliepiacuiarsJi-rm^." , ;.v,pd a sat sfaction
the object of worship and secured Uivine favour.
Summing up, then, we define sacrifice as an act, belo.™in.' to the sphere of worship in which a mated ^oblation fs presented to the Deity and consumed in His service, and -^''''^ has a i^s object to secure through communion with a Divine being the boon of His favour.
sphere of holy things, or in wie "h'"' . „„.,;i.\i\iiT ordi-
pre-Chr stian """^"P- The groug M »o a ^^^^_,^^,^.^,
",^rthit'?Sic°»^hr?«^^^^^^
t°rr^™" '"<i'»- S?' °- ^^prarJo^rtnvol^ed Ihe
''■'^.fri'flLla «mmonly re,en«i to in OT by «P«'' jf,X^° leading varicties-vij. the Bumt-oilen.ig (n^-y), and the Sam flcial Feast (:Ss'). There are, however, two terms, which have " geneT^ well as a specific meaning. The ..np (a gift) wa.
I;^"^S '^t;i^e:"'V;;^e;;nniin^s^he ^nuin
Thtorietas to ttie significance origina y attached to the rite, its primitive form, and the stages in the evolution of sacrificial ritual.
while strongly ^nt^nded for by ■^anj kc „^„alive.
cannot be sustained e^en on the b^^s Of t ^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^
The argument on which ';'"f ' [.^'"'.rujce (Gn 4!"), and the
-s'yeS^.;^« =J £»ra%iS:^
sarily implies that there !""'' ^a ,e '.|'^etnfent ^presupposed assurance ?f the Divnne nonn controversy is disclosed
assurance of the D'vnne nonne^ a,.. ^... w . -_;^- -r ^,,^,^,- ^ perhaps, of the zea on tins side of the cont J^^^ , ^^^
in the argument that ^,''™^" °7,fp (ii,,;^,';,,^;.,., Col 2'-^), apostolic ^"demnation of «.lUvoi^h.p m ' prerogative
^","h' ^''irThoW th n^ Con'ceSe that sacrifi'ie, the dis- in the sphere of ho > tnmp^- ^^^„ devising and yet
tinctive teature of 01 "°^!"JP' "rt, i„„ossible to make good acceptable to God and it *"came in possinie^ b ^^
against Roman, Lutheran and Anglican prac ^^^.^^^ .^ festivals or rites ^""J'';^ thirdOL^.alic prepossession has
8cript.ure As the * f?* ^^ ^'^''^fn^S^ u,at the ^vill-worship' coiisideraby abated It is^easj to -un^^ ^ ^^ ^^^^^
to Spencer, a« ^oY'uv discussed bv Fairbaim {Tvpolog;/ o/ subject 18 '^'so„\">,'"' J ""'dvances the additional argument Smptur,; y •^6 J:\ ,'''2^8^ ,,a"ents ' co.ats ot skins '(On 321) that in making '°'-°"'' S JhertVwhich serves as a covering God prompted and authonzed the rite ^Ml 1^
ofthesoul. Uispositionis.ho e^eramcuia^^B^^^
rS'^se^1-.eSnt°to;?;of wo.h,p but^.. i^^^
existence altogether '" P^^"^"^^'^ '^Sse o? modified eon- eonilicting tniSitio^^and st.1 mo^-^becau^ ,„ scripture, there
T'ZT. gro'«^n" inSiV^ition <« use the scnptural matenal
ITa basis f'or a 'i^'^^^'i^i':';:^^:^^: JXl'^ZZ U
Divine nstitution, it should ■'' ,'"™' „!r,r,hia theorv has even
?'>^..''^T^;°al s%^5,Ts'b«n v^;!"^ nem^yf abt'dlT<P The only in theological schools oecni I r>,t, ^ ^ ^ that, by creating
sense in "■'ji'^h t^he Div ne orig n can be hel .^^^.^^^.J^„ „,, j^^ man tor religion, God '^ the •"'"'" ^ universal expression. ''"^''^j^frr^^^SA «^^:"o .«^;« a Hu^an origin ma,
SACKIFICE
SACRIFICE
331
hrre be briefly outlined, inasmuch as, while operating mainly with general anthropological material, they seek confirmation to flome extent in the Diblical sacrificial system. These theories may be best grasped in accordance witii the views which they presuppose as to the primitive form of reli^'ion, and by which. It may be added, they must mainly be jud;,'t_-d.
0) In the first place, we meet with two theories which rest on tlie assumption that the reli^on of primitive man was a monotheism. Either by way of mtuitiou, or as the result of rtllcxion on the world and man, it is supposed that the human mind hod acquired a knowledge at least of the unity and of the <;inlinal attributes of God. Uniler the Impression of this kiiowledj^e uian may be supposed to have gone on to shape bacniicial rites, and that from either of two motives, (a) The Expiatory tfi>ortj is to the effect that man, conscious of sin aiKl of the punishment which it merits, substituted an animal victim which should endure the penalty due to himself, and so make his peace with God. This interpretation of the rite, it is true, has usually been identified with the advocacy of a DiWne institution, but it at least holds its place in the popular niinii— apart from any question of orijjin — as furnishing the explanation of the a^je-long searching after God through tile ritual of the slaujihtered victim and the smoking altar.— (t) The Uonia^e theorij of Sacrifice has been more favoured by those writers who regard the institution as a natural out- growth from a priulitive monotheism. On this view man was mipelled to seek closer communion with God, not out of a sense of guilt, but rather out of a desire to acknowledge his dependence and profess his obedience. To give expression to these devout sentiments he fell back on the language which is more powerful than speech— the language of action ( Warburton, Diti. Lrg. iv. 4). 'To such men (Cain and Abel) there came Uioughts of one who is ruling them as they rule the sheep, who in some strange way makes the seeds grow which they put into the ground. . . . How sliall they confess Him, and manifest their subjection? Speech, thanksgiving are not the moiit chillilike way of testifying homage. Acts go before words' (Maurice, Sacrifice, p. C).