ATONEMENT
the
Passover,
in
which
blood
sprinkled
gave
protection
from
destruction;
at
the
ratification
of
the
Covenant,
peace-offerings
appear
with
burnt-oflerings
(Ex
20^
245);
finally,
the
Levitical
ritual
provided
a
cultus
in
which
the
idea
of
atonement
had
a
leading
place.
Critical
questions
as
to
the
age
of
this
legislation
need
not
detain
us,
for
there
is
an
increasing
tendency
to
recognize
that,
whatever
the
date
of
the
final
codification
of
the
Levitical
laws,
the
bulk
of
these
laws
rest
on
older
usages.
That
the
propitiatory
idea
in
sacrifice
goes
back
to
early
times
may
be
seen
in
such
pictures
of
patriarchal
piety
as
Job
is
42'-
';
while
an
atoning
virtue
is
expressly
assumed
as
belonging
to
sacrifice
in
1
S
3".
Cf.
also
allusions
to
sin-
and
guilt-offerings,
and
to
propitiatory
rites
In
so
old
a
stratum
of
laws
as
the
'Law
of
HoUness'
(Lv
19»-
»
23"),
and
in
Hos
4»,
Mic
66-
',
Ezk
40^'
421'
etc.
It
is
in
the
Levitical
system
that
all
the
ideas
involved
in
OT
sacrifice
come
to
clearest
expression.
The
Epistle
to
the
Hebrews
admirably
seizes
the
idea
of
the
system.
It
has
absolutely
nothing
to
do
with
the
ideas
that
underlay
heathen
rites,
but
rests
on
a
basis
of
its
own.
It
provides
a
means
by
which
the
people,
notwith-standing
their
sin,
maintain
their
fellowship
with
God,
and
enjoy
His
favour.
It
rests
in
all
its
parts
on
the
idea
of
the
holiness
of
God,
and
is
designed
throughout
to
impress
on
the
mind
of
the
worshipper
the
sense
of
the
separation
which
sin
has
made
between
him
and
God.
Even
with
sacrifice
the
people
could
not
.
approach
God
directly,
but
only
through
the
priesthood.
The
priests
alone
could
enter
the
sacred
enclosure;
into
the
Most
Holy
Place
even
the
priests
were
not
permitted
to
enter,
but
only
the
high
priest,
and
he
but
once
a
year,
and
then
only
with
blood
of
sacrifice,
offered
first
for
himself
and
then
for
the
people;
all
this
signifying
that
'
the
way
into
the
holiest
of
all
was
not
yet
made
manifest'
(He
9'-
*).
The
details
of
the
sacrificial
ritual
must
be
sought
elsewhere
(see
Sacrifice).
It
is
to
be
noted
generally
that
the
animal
sacrifices
were
of
four
kinds
—
the
burnt-offering,
the
sin-offering,
the
guilt-offering
(a
species
of
sin-offering
which
included
a
money-com-pensation
to
the
person
injured),
the
peace-offering.
The
victims
must
be
unblemished;
the
presentation
was
accompanied
by
imposition
of
hands
(on
meaning,
cf.
Lv
1621);
the
blood,
after
the
victim
was
killed,
was
sprinkled
on
and
about
the
altar:
on
the
Day
of
Atonement
it
was
taken
also
within
the
veil.
The
burnt-offering
was
wholly
consumed;
in
the
case
of
the
peace-offering
a
feast
was
held
with
part
of
the
flesh.
No
sacrifice
was
permitted
for
sins
done
'pre-sumptuously,'
or
with
'a
high
hand'
(Nu
15=").
The
design
of
all
these
sacrifices
(even
of
the
peace-
offering,
as
features
of
the
ritual
show)
was
'to
make
atonement'
for
the
sin
of
the
offerer,
or
of
the
con-gregation
(Lv
1<
4M-
28.
31
5«
17"
etc.).
The
word
so
translated
means
primarily
'to
cover,'
then
'to
propitiate'
or
'expiate.'
The
atoning
virtue
is
declared
in
Lv
17"
to
reside
in
the
blood,
as
the
vehicle
of
the
soul
or
life.
The
effect
of
the
offering
was
to
'cover'
the
person
or
offence
from
the
eyes
of
a
holy
God,
i.e.
to
annul
guilt
and
procure
forgiveness.
It
'cleansed'
from
moral
and
ceremonial
pollution.
From
this
point
theories
take
their
origin
as
to
the
precise
signification
of
sacrificial
atonement.
(1)
Was
the
act
purely
symbolical
—
an
expression
of
penitence,
conf
essioa.prayer,
consecration,
surrender
of
one's
life
to
God?
Hardly;
for
if,
in
oneway,
the
victim
is
identified
with
the
offerer,
in
another
it
is
distinguished
from
him
as
a
creature
through
whose
blood-shedding
expiation
is
made
for
his
sin.
(2)
la
the
Idea,
then,
as
many
hold,
that
the
blood
represents
a
fmre
life
put
between
the
sinful
soul
and
God
—
an
innocent
ife
covenng
a
polluted
one?
In
this
case
the
death
is
held
to
be
immaterial,
and
the
manipulation
of
the
blood,
regarded
as
still
fresh
and
living,
is
the
one
thing
of
import-ance.
The
theory
comes
short
m
not
recognizing
that,
in
any
case,
there
is
in
the
act
the
acknowledgment
of
God's
righteous
sentence
upon
sin
—
else
why
bring
sacrifice
of
■
72
ATONEMENT
atonement
at
all?
It
ia
true
that
the
blood
represents
the
lite,
but
it
is
aurely
not
as
life
aimply,
but
as
life
taken
—life
given
up
in
death
—
that
the
blood
is
presented
on
the
altar
aa
a
covering
for
sin.
It
would
be
hard
otherwise
to
explain
how
in
the
NT"
so
much
stress
is
alwaya
laid
on
death,
or
the
shedding
of
the
blood,
as
the
means
of
redemp-tion.
(3)
There
remains
the
view
that
the
victim
is
regarded
aa
expiating
the
guilt
of
the
offerer
by
itself
dying
in
hia
room
—
yielding
up
ita
life
in
his
stead
m
acknowledgment
of
the
judgment
of
God
on
his
sin.
This,
which
ia
the
older
view,
la
probably
still
the
truer.
The
theory
of
Ritachl,
that
the
sacrifices
had
nothing
to
do
with
sin,
but
were
simply
a
protection
against
the
terrible
'majesty'
of
God,
is
generally
allowed
to
be
untenable.
3.
There
is
yet
a
third
line
of
preparation
for
this
doctrine
in
the
OT,
viz.:
the
prophetic.
The
prophets,
at
first
sight,
seem
to
take
up
a
position
altogether
antagonistic
to
sacrifices.
Seeing,
however,
that
in
many
indirect
ways
they
recognize
its
legitimacy,
and
even
include
it
in
their
pictures
of
a
restored
theocracy
(cf.
Is
56«-
'
60'
66M,
Jer
17^-2'
33"-
's
etc.),
their
polemic
must
be
regarded
as
against
the
abuse
rather
than
the
use.
The
proper
prophetic
preparation,
however,
lay
along
a
different
line
from
the
sacrificial.
The
basis
of
it
is
in
the
idea
of
the
Righteous
Sufferer,
which
is
seen
shaping
itself
in
the
Prophets
and
the
Psalms
(cf.
Ps
22).
The
righteous
man,
both
through
the
persecutions
he
sustains
and
the
national
calamities
arising
from
the
people's
sins
which
he
shares,
is
a
living
exemplification
of
the
law
of
the
innocent
suffering
for
the
guilty.
Such
suffering,
however,
while
giving
weight
to
intercession,
is
not
in
itself
atoning.
But
in
the
picture
of
the
Servant
of
Jehovah
in
Is
53
a
new
idea
emerges.
The
sufferings
arising
from
the
people's
sins
have,
in
this
Holy
One,
become,
through
the
spirit
in
which
they
are
borne,
and
the
Divine
purpose
in
permitting
them,
sufferings
for
sin
—
vicarious,
healing,
expiatory.
Their
expiatory
character
is
affirmed
in
the
strongest
manner
in
the
successive
verses,
and
sacrificial
language
is
freely
taken
over
upon
the
sufferer
(vv.'-
6-
8.
i»-i2).
Here
at
length
the
ideas
of
prophecy
and
those
of
sacrificial
law
coincide,
and,
though
there
is
no
second
instance
of
like
clear
and
detailed
por-traiture,
it
is
not
difficult
to
recognize
the
recurrence
of
the
same
ideas
in
later
prophecies,
e.g.,
in
Zee
3'
12i°
131-
',
Dn
92i-2«.
With
such
predictions
on
its
lips
OT
prophecy
closes,
awaiting
the
time
when,
in
Malachi's
words,
the
Lord,
whom
mensought,
would
comesuddenly
to
His
Temple
(3i).
ii.
In
the
New
Testament.
—
The
period
between
the
OT
and
the
NT
affords
little
for
our
purpose.
It
is
certain
that,
in
the
time
of
our
Lord,
even
it,
as
some
think,
there
were
partial
exceptions,
the
great
mass
of
the
Jewish
people
had
no
idea
of
a
suffering
Messiah,
or
thought
of
any
connexion
between
the
Messiah
and
the
sacrifices.
If
atonement
was
needed,
it
was
to
be
sought
for,
apart
from
the
sacrifices,
in
almsgiving
and
other
good
deeds;
and
the
virtues
of
the
righteous
were
regarded
as
in
some
degree
availing
for
the
wicked.
It
was
a
new
departure
when
Jesus
taught
that
'the
Christ
should
suffer'
(cf.
Mk
9i»,
Lk
24«).
Yet
in
His
own
suffering
and
death
He
claimed
to
be
fulfilling
the
Law
and
the
Prophets
(Lk
22^'
24").
1.
Lite
and
Teaching
of
Jesus.
—
The
main
task
of
Jesus
on
earth
was
to
reveal
the
Father,
to
disclose
the
true
nature
of
the
Kingdom
of
God
and
its
righteous-ness,
in
opposition
to
false
ideals,
to
lead
men
to
the
recognition
of
His
Messiahship,
to
recover
the
lost,
to
attach
a
few
faithful
souls
to
Himself
as
the
founda-tion
of
His
new
Kingdom,
and
prepare
their
minds
for
His
death
and
resurrection,
and
for
the
after
duty
of
spreading
His
gospel
among
mankind.
The
dependence
of
the
Messianic
salvation
on
His
Person
and
activity
is
everywhere
presupposed;
but
it
was
only
in
frag-mentary
and
partial
utterances
that
He
was
able
for
a
time
to
speak
of
its
connexion
with
His
death.
Alike
in
the
Synoptics
and
in
John
we
see
how
this
denouement
is
gradually
led
up
to.
At
His
birth
it
is
declared
of
