Literature.— R. H. Charles, art. in HDB ; B. W. Bacon, art. in DCQ ; K. Kohler, art. in JE ; W. MuUer in PRE^ (full account of extant inscriptions); C. Schoettg'en, Hor. Heb., Leipzig-, 1733. L. St. AlBAN WeLLS.
ALTAR.— In the NT, as in the LXX, the usual
term for ' altar ' is dvaiaaT-fipLov — a v/ord otherwise confined to Philo, Josephus, and ecclesiastical writers — while jScafj-ds, as contrasted with a Jewish place of sacrifice, is a heathen altar. The most striking example of the antithesis is found in 1 Mac p4-5a_ Antiochus Epiphanes erected a small altar to Jupiter — ' the abomination of desolation ' (v.*^) — upon the Ovaiaarripiov of the temple, and ' on the twentj'-fifth day of the month they sacrificed upon the idol-altar (/Swyttos) which was upon the altar of God (dvaiaaTTjpiov).' The NT contains only a single distinct reference to a pagan altar — the j3u}/ii6s which St. Paul observed in Athens bearing the inscription ' Ayvuxmi) Qei^ (Ac 17-'*).
1. The altar on which sacrifices were presented to God was indispensable to OT religion. Alike in the simple cultus of patriarchal times and the ela- borate ritual of fully developed Judaism, its posi- tion was central. The altar was the place of meeting between God and man, and the ritual of blood — the supposed seat of life — was the essence of the offering. Whatever details might be added, the rite of sprinkling or dashing the blood against the altar, or allowing it to flow on the ground at its base, could never be omitted. The Levitical cultus was continued in Jerusalem till the destruc- tion of the Temple by the Romans in A.D. 70, and the attitude and practice of the early Jewish- Christian Church in reference to it form an interest- ing and ditlicult problem. It has been generally assumed that, when our Lord instituted the New Covenant in His own blood (Mk 14^^ Lk 222"), He implicitly abrogated the Levitical law, and that, when His sacrifice was completed, the disciples must at once have perceived that it made every altar obsolete. But there is not wanting evidence that enlightenment came slowly ; that the practice of the Jewish-Christian Church was not altered sud- denly, but gradually and with not a little misgiving. Hort observes that ' respecting the continued ad- herence to Jewish observances, nothing is said which implies either its presence or its absence' (Judaistic Christianity, 42). But there are many clear indications that the first Christians remained Jews — McGitl'ert (Apostol. Age, 65) even suggests tiiat they were ' more devout and earnest Jews than they had ever been ' — continuing to worship God at the altar in the Temple like all their countrymen. ' They had no desire to be renegades, nor was it possible to regard them as such. Even if they did not maintain and observe the whole cultus, yet this did not endanger their allegiance. . . . The Christians did not lay themselves open to the charge of violating the law' ( Weizsacker,^pci5^o^. Age, i. 46). They went up to the Temple at the hour of prayer (Ac 3'), which was the hour of sacri- fice ; they took upon themselves vows, and offered sacrifices for release (2P"- -'') ; and even St. Paul, the champion of spiritual freedom, brought sacri- fices (wpocrtpopas) to lay on the altar in the Holy City (24''). The inference that the New Covenant left no place for any altar or Mosaic sacrifice is first expli- citlj- drawn by the w^riter of Hebrews (see TEMPLE).
2. Apart from a passing allusion to the altars which were thrown down in Elijah's time (Ro IP), St. Paul makes two uses of the 6vaiaaT7]piov in the Temple. (1) In vindicating the right of ministers of the gospel to live at the charge of the Christian community, he instances the well-known Levitical practice : ' those who wait upon the altar have their portion with (av/^fiepi^ovTai.) the altar ' (1 Co 9'^), part of the ottering being burnt in the altar fire, and part reserved for the priests, to whom the law gives the privilege ' altaris esse socios in dividenda victima' (Beza). Schmiedel (m ^c.) thinks that the refer- ence may be to priests who serve ' am Tempel der Heiden wie der Juden,' but probably for St. Paul the only Ovaiaa-ri^piopv/a.s the altar on which sacrifice
52
AMBASSADOE
AMEK
was offered to the God of Israel. (2) In arguing againsc the possibility of partaking of the Eucharist and joining in idolatrous festivals, St. Paul appeals to the ethical significance of sacrifice, regarded not as an atonement but as a sacred meal between God and man. The altar being His table and the sacri- fice His feast, the hospitality of table-comnuinion is the pledge of friendship between Him and His worshippers. All who join in the sacrifice are par- takers with the altar (kolvoovoI toO dvaiaarrjplov), one might almost say commensals with God. ' Accord- ing to antique ideas, those who eat and drink together are by the very act tied to one another by a bond of friendship and mutual obligation ' ( W. R. Smith, Rel. Sern.^, 247). How revolting it is, then, to pass from the altar of God or, by parity of reasoning, from the rpkire'^a tov Kvplov, to the orgies of pagan gods, the Tpajre^a, daip-ovluv.