SACRIFICE
SACRIFICE
433
portance, however, in view of apostolic concojitions to note tluit such saeiilices — the hi^'hest in vjihie the I,eviticiil syteni i)roviileil — availed only for sins of ij,'noranfe, for unwitting transgression of holy things and for the removal of physical un- cleanness, which was regarded as implying moral as well as ceremonial disaliility in drawing near to God (Nu 15*')' I'or wilful sins — 'sins with a high hand ' — no reconciling sacrifice was provided in Israel ; the penalty of such sins was deaths' that soul was cut oil' from Israel.' But even such sins were not beyond the reach of forgiveness. That such sinners might through confession and true penitence approach God, and through His grace, ajiart from sacrifice, meet with His mercy was the evangelical proclamation of the prophets. It was held, however, by later Jewish interpreters that the ' scapegoat ' on the great Day of Atonement expiated the sins of all Israelites who had not deliberately put themselves outside its eli'ecta by forsaking the religion of their people : and this exjiiatiou was applied so as to include sins the penalty of which was ' to be cut off from his people,' or death (cf. EBi iv. 4219, 4224).
(rf) Later Jewish. — The whole question of the expiatory value of Jewish sacrifices generally is keenly debated amongst modern scholars. The theory of the penal substitution of the life of the animal victim in place of the life of the otierer, which was formerly regarded as almost an axiomatic principle of interpretation, now meets with cogent criticism. Whilst this theory is still held on the ground of evidence direct and indirect in biblical and post-biblical ideas or usage, it must be said that probably the majority of modern scholars regard it as no longer tenable. Much in the discussion of these opposing positions turns upon the confidence which should be placed upon the theories of sacrifice prevalent in later Judaism. If the date and adequacy of the valu- able materials collected from later Jewish sources, belonging to the time when the institution of the Synagogue was growing up side by side with the sacrificial worship of the Temple, could be depended upon, they would afford data of the highest import- ance in seeking to interpret the ideas of the apostolic literature, whose writers had been taught in the synagogue or in the Rabbinical schools. The present difficulty, how-ever, of gathering the old Jewish theory of sacrifice from these sources may be illustrated by the contrary judgments of two scholars who have had access to them. Holtz- mann sums up the result thus : ' Everything pressed towards the assumption that the ottering of a life, substituted for sinners according to God's appointment, cancelled the death jienalty which tliey had incurred, and that consequently the ottered blood of the sacrificial victims expiated sin as a surrogate for the life of the guilty ' {Neutest. Theol. i. 6S, quoted by W. P. Paterson, art. ' Sacri- fice ' in HDB iv. 342" ; cf. Stevens, Theol. of the NT, p. 409). G. F. Moore holds an opposite opinion : ' The theory that the victim's life is jjut in place of the owner's is nowhere hinted at, perhaps because the Jewish doctors understood better than our theologians what sin ott'erings and trespass ott'erings were, and what they were for ' (EBi iv. 4226). Such a measure of disagreement need not, however, lead to the position assumed by other scholars that no theory underlay the prac- tice of sacrifice in Israel : ' A precise answer to the question how the sacrificial worship influenced God men were unable to give. 'When in the blood of the Sin-ott'ering the tie between God and His people was renewed, what was felt was the weird influence of the incomprehensible '(Smend, Alttest. Bdigiotisge-feh., p. 324). Apostolic writers held that there is a simple answer given in Lv 17" to the
VOL. II. — 28
question how sacrifice exjiiates — ^' it is tlie blood that niaketh atonement.' ' According to the law, I may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, aiul apart from shedding of blood there is no remission' (He 9'-'-). Two other important tendencies of the later Jewish period also passed as influential juinciples for sacrificial interpreta- tion into the apostolic teaching: (a) the strong tendency to recognize the sutterings, ami especially the death, of righteous men as atoning for the sins of othernien. l'"or instance, the merits of Abraham served to cover the sins of his posterity ; such ex- piatory value of sullering is also ajjplied to the svillerings of Moses, Ezekiel, and .Jeremiah, and to the pas.sion of the martyrs ; it was also pre-eminently illustrated in the career of the Sullering Servant of Is ,53. These sutterings constituted a ground of forgiveness of sin in Israel ; they are exjiressly compared, in point of efficacy, to the Day of Atonement (Pciiqta, Viib). These tendencies probably influenced profoundly the sacrificial theory of the age ; for it was a transition easily made from the vicarious death of the righteous to the belief in substitution of animal victims, or possibly by a fortiori reasoning from the value of thesubstitutionary death of tlieaninial victim to that of the righteous saint (cf.' 2 Mac 7", 4 Mac 6=»). (b) Whilst the sacrificial ceremonies were most scrupulously observed and with great ]iomp and solemnity, a process was going on which was loosening the hold of sacrifice upon the Jewish religion. A reluctant admission was beginning to be made — which ultimately found its logical and historical completion in apostolic Christianity — that it was not a full expression of the relation of His people to God, and was not wholly essential for their communion with Him. Sacrificial worship was being gradually co-ordinated with that of the synagogue. Owing to the rene<\'ed authority of the teaching of the prophets, and the widening distance from the Temple services of the multijjlied congregations of the Dispersion, knowledge ot the Law and the ethical value of good deeds became recognized forms of religious activity which were regarded as directly well-pleasing to God ; the Rabbi and the scribe became at least comple- mentary authorities, often indeed competitors with the priest and the Levite. The destruction ot the Second Temple within the Apostolic Age so quickened the rapidity with which traditional authority became superior to sacrificial that it was officially taught that the study of the Law was more valuable in the sight of God tlian the con- tinual burnt-ottering (Mcgilla, 36, 106, Pesiqta, 6U6). The fact that within the Apostolic Age the abolition of sacrifice as a national mode of worship in Jewish religion had become, through the destruc- tion of Jerusalem, a necessity may well be helpful in defining the attitude of apostolic writers to- wards sacrifice.