The Pulpit Commentary — 2 Samuel — Section 616

Yer. 25.-Ejficacio'l/,/I sacrifices. These sacrifices of David illustrate the nature and purpose of such offerings under the Law. David acted in obedience to a message from God (ver. 18). He did not offer sacrifices in order to ren/ler God merciful; it was the mercy of God which originated them. It was because he would stay the destroying pestilence that he directed David to offer them. Still, the sacrifices were a condition of the exercise of his mercy. It was when they had been offered that "the Lord was entreated for the land, and the plague was stayed from Israel." Hence the question arises--Why·should the Merciful One have required the death of ir;rnocent victims in order that his mercy might be displayed in the cessation of the ~tilence? If it be said that this method of entreating him was a solemn and expressive acknowledgment that the sins which occasioned the pestilence were deserving of death, the answer may be accepted as a partial explanation. But the qnestion recurs-Why should not tbe confession of sin, with sincere penitence, be accepted without the infliction of death ori the innocent? 'l'he only satisfying answer is that which takes into account the justice as well as the mercy of God, and recognizes in the death of the innocent an atonement for the guilt of those to whom mercy is shown. In exercising bis mercy, God would also "declare his righteousness ... that he might be just" while justifying the sinner (Rom. iii. 25, 26), and that men, while seeking and obtaining forgiveness, might discern more clearly, feel more deeply, and acknowledge more heartily, the righteousness of the sentence which condemned them to death. These remarks apply more especially to the "burnt offerings." The "peace offerings" (thank offerings) were added apparently as an expression of joyful gratitude for the deliverance which was confio.ently·expected through the sacrifice of the burnt offerings. The text reminds us of another sacrifice. which was offered ten centuries later near the site of David's altar, and which .has rendered all other offerings for sin superfluous and unlawful. It may tend. to the better understanding of both to view them together, noting their resem- blances and contrasts. I. THEIR RESEMBLANCES. 1. In their origin. Both were of Divine origin and appointment. They originated in.the love and righteousness and wisdom of God-his perception of ~hat "became him" (Heh. ii. 10).. 2. In their 11atu.re. As making atonement for sin,.by which God was "entreated," and the exercise of his forgiving mercy rendered consistent with a due regnrd for juslice. 3. In their significance for men. Displaying the evil of sin and the Divine displeasure against it, and at the same time the loving-kindness of God-his readiness to pardon ; and thus tending to produce at once abhorrence of sin and penitential grief, and the assured hope of pardon. 4. In their results. Reconciliation between God and sinners; forgiveness of sin and deliverance from its penalties; renewed enjoyment of the favour of God; renewed con- fidence in and obedience to him ; added strength to resist temptation. II. 'fHE INCALCULABLE SUPERIORITY OF THE SACRIFICE OF OUR LORD. 1. David offered the lives of animals; our blessed Lord offered himself. They were of little value; but who shall calculate the worth of him who was not only the perfect Man, but the Word Incarnate, the only begotten Son of God? They could not understand the transaction in which they were made to participate, and could take no voluntary pa.rt in the sacrifice. But Jesus entered fully into the mind of God, shared to the utmost his love to sinners and hatred of their sins, made the Divine purpose his own, and in devoted obedience to the will of the Father surrendered himself willingly to suffering and death for our salvatiou. The virtue of his sacrifice a.rose from his Divine dignity, his perfect oneness with the Father in mind and heart, and his perfect obedience unto death (John x. 17, 18; Phil. ii. 6--8; Heb. ix. 14; x. 5-10). 2. David provided. his own sacrifices; Jesus was the Gfft of God. (l John iv. 9, 10.) No man, no creatu_re. could provide n sacrifice of sufficient worth to really and effectually atone for the sma 632 THE SECOND BOOK OF SAMUEL. [clt. XXIV. 1-26,