Part 58
-pan, flne flom' mingled with oil parted into pieces and oil thereon; if of the frying pan, the same ingredients. Ijeaven and honey must never be used as they quickly become corrupt. Every offering must be seasoned with
salt. If of the first-fruits (bikkurim), it should consist of corn in the ear, parched with oil and frankincense upon it.
for this sin. Vengeance was executed on 3,000 Is-
raelites. Moses mightily interceded with God. A moral reaction was begun; new tables of the Law were made with more stringent laws against idols and idol worship (Ex 32 1-35). At the setting-up of the tabernacle burnt and meal offerings were sacrificed (Ex 40 29). The law of the burnt offering is found in Lev 1
(2) The ritual for the priest {Lev 2 1-16).—This required him to take out a handful with the oil and frankincense thereon and burn it as a memorial upon the altar. The remainder was holy and belonged to the priest. Of the cakes, after bringing them to the altar, he was to take a portion, burn it and appropriate the remainder ; the same with the first-fruits.
(3) General laws for the priest (Lev 6 14-18 [Heb
5. Law of Common altars and customary burnt the Burnt offerings needed no minute regulations, Offering but this ritual was intended primarily Qolah) for the priest, and was taught to the people as needed. They were for the statutory individual and national offering upon the "homed" altar before the sanctuary. Already
7-11], etc).—He might eat his portion without leaven
in the holy place. At his anointing Aaron offered
his own oblation of fine flour ^ of an ephah, one-
half in the morning and one-haff in the evening. If
baked, it must be with oil. This meal offering must
all be burnt; none could be eaten. With the sin and guilt offerings every meal offering baked in any way belongs to the priest (Lev 7 9.10; 10 12; Nu 18 9). The meal offerings accompanied the other
the daily burnt offerings of the priests had been provided for (Ex 29 38-42). The burnt offering is here
called korhan, "oblation."
offerings on all important occasions, such as the
(1) The ritual Jor the offerer {Lev 1 3-17).—This may have been from the herd or flock or fowls, brought to the tent of meeting; hands were laid
consecration of Aaron (Lev 9 4.17); cleansing of
a leper (Lev 14 10.20.21.31); feast of first-fruits
Sacrifice (OT) THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2644
The sin offering was a sacrifice of a special kind, doubtless pecuhar to Israel and first mentioned at the consecration of Aaron and his
(Lev 23 13); Pentecost (Lev 23 16); set feasts (Lev 23 37). Special charge was given to Eleazar to care for the continual meal offerings (Nu 4 16). The Nazirite must offer it (Nu 6 15.17). When the tribes presented their offerings, meal offerings were always included (Nu 7 13.19, etc); when the Levites were set apart (Nu 8 8); with vows of freewill offerings (Nu 15 4.6) ; with the sin offerings (15 24) ; at all the several seasons (Nu 28 5 29 39). A special form was the "showbread" (bread of memorial). Twelve loaves were to be placed in two rows or heaps of six each on a pure table in the holy place, with frankincense on each pile or row. These were to remain for one -week and then to be eaten by the priests. They were an offering of food by fire, though probably only the frankincense was actually burned (Lev 24 5f).
8. The Sin sons. It is not then spoken of as an Offering innovation. It was of special value as an expiatory sacrifice.
(1) Use at the consecration of Aaron and his sons {Ex 29 10ff).—A bullock was killed before the
altar, some blood was put upon the horns of the altar by Moses, the rest was poured out at the base. The fat of the inwards was burned upon the altar, the flesh and skin were burned without the camp. Every day during the consecration this was done (Ex 29 36).
(2) The law of the sin offering {Lev 4 1-S5; 6 24-30, etc).— (a) The occasion and meaning: Specifically to atone for unwitting sins, sins of error {sh'ghdghdh) , mistakes or rash acts, unknown at the time, but afterward made known. There were gradations of these for several classes of offenders: the anointed priest (vs 3-12), the whole congregation
The peace offerings indicated right relations with God, expressing good-fellowship, gratitude and obligation. The common altars were 7. Law of fitted for their use (Ex 20 24), as the Peace feasts had been thus celebrated from Offering time immemorial. At the feast before God on the Mount, peace offerings provided the food (Ex 24 5) ; also before the golden bull (Ex 32 6). The wave and heave offerings were portions of these.
(vs 13-21), a ruler (vs 22-26), one of the common people (vs 27-35), forswearing (5 1), touching an unclean thing (ver 2) or the imcleanness of man (ver 3), or rashly swearing in ignorance (ver 4). For conscious and wifful violations of the Law, no atonement was possible, with some exceptions, for which provision was made in the guilt offerings (see below)
(1) The ritual for the ogerer (Lev 3 1-17).—The offering might be a bullock, a lamb, or a goat, either male or female, latitude being allowed In tliis case. The ritual was the same as in the case of the l:»umt offering
(b) The ritual for the offerer (Lev 4 1-5.13, etc): The anointed priest must offer a bullock at the tent of meeting, lay his hands upon it and slay it before Jeh. The congregation was also required to bring a young bullock before the tent of meeting, the elders were to lay hands upon it and slay it before Jeh. The ruler must bring a lie-goat and do the same. One of the common people might bring a she-goat or lamb and present it in the same manner. If too poor for these, two turtledoves or young pigeons, one for a sin offering and one for a burnt offering, would suffice. If too poor for these, the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense would suffice.
(2) The ritual for the priest (Lev 3 1-17).—Blood must be sprinkled on the altar round about, the caul, the liver and the kidneys must be taken away and the fat parts bm'ned on the altar; the fat tail of the lamb must also be burned. These portions were offerings of food by fire to the Deity. The ritual for a goat was the same as for a bullock.
(see above).
(3) General laws for the priest (Lev 6 12 [Heb 5]; 7 1 ff).—The fat was to be burned on the altar of burnt offering. If it was a thank offering (zebhah ha-todhah), it must have unleavened cakes with oil, cakes mingled with oil and fine fiour soaked. Cakes of leavened bread might be offered, and one cake was to be a heave offering to the priest. The fiesh was to be eaten that day, none was to be left till morning (Lev 22 30). If it was a votive offering {zebhah nedher) or a freewill offering {zebhah n'dhdhhdh), it might be eaten on the first and second days, but not on the third day; it should then be an abomination (Lev 7 18 f). If eaten then by anyone, that per.son was to be cut off from the community. Of all peace oft'erings the wave-breast and heave-thigh belong to the priest (Lev 7 29-34), the remainder was to be eaten by the worshippers. At Aaron's consecration an ox and a ram were the peace offerings (Lev 9 4. 18.22). The priest's portion was to be eaten in a clean place by the priest's family (Lev 10 14). When Israel should have a central sanctuary, all were to be brought there (Lev 17 4.5). When they had no central place, the common altars would suffice. All peace offerings must be made in an acceptable manner (Lev 19 5). Votive offerings must be perfect (Lev 22 18-22), but certain imperfections are allowable in freewill offerings (ver 23). At Pentecost two he-lambs of the first year could be offered as peace offerings (Lev 23 19). The Nazirite at the end of his separation must offer one ram for a peace offering with unleavened bread (Nu 6 14.17), and the hair shaved from his head must be burned under the peace offerings (6 18). This hair was regarded as a thing having life and offered as a sacrifice by other nations. The various tribes brought peace offerings (ch 7, passim), and at the feast of trumpets the people were to rejoice and blow trumpets over the peace offerings (10 10). Some further regulations are given (15 9 f).
(c) The ritual for the priest (Lev 4 1-5.13, etc): He must bring the bullock's blood to the tent of meeting, dip his finger into it and sprinkle blood 7 t before the veil of the sanctuary, and put some on the horns of the altar of incense, but most of the blood must be poured out at the base of the altar. The fat must be burned upon the altar, all the rest of the carcase must be carried to a clean place without the camp and burned. In the case of the whole congregation, the ritual is the same. In the case of a ruler, the blood is to be put upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, not the altar of incense. In the case of one of the common people, the ritual is similar to that of the ruler. In both the latter cases the carcase belonged to the priest. If a bird, the priest must wring off its head, sprinkle some blood on the side of the altar and pour the rest at the base. Nothing is said of the disposal of the carcase. If of fine flour, the priest must take out a handful and burn it upon the altar, keeping the remainder for himself. The use of fine flour for an expiatory sacrifice is evidentlj' exceptional and intended to be so. Though life was not given, yet a necessity of life—that which represented Ufe—was offered.
{d) General laws for the priest (Lev 6 24-30): The sin offering was to be slain in the same place as the burnt offering. It was most holy, and the priest alone might eat what was left of the ram, pigeon or flour, in the holy place. Whatever touched it was to be holy, any garment sprinkled with the blood must be washed in a holy place, earthen vessels used must be broken, and brazen vessels thoroughly scoured and rinsed.
(e) Special uses of the sin offering: (i) The consecration of Aai-on and his sons (Lev 8 2.14.15) was similar to that of Lev 4 11.12, only Moses was to kill the offering and put the blood on the horns of the altar. On the 8th day a bull-caff was offered (9 2), and the congregation offered a he-goat (ver 3). In this case Aaron perfonned the ceremony, as in Lev 4 11.12. Moses complained that they had not eaten the flesh of the calf and goat in the sanctuary, since that was requisite when the blood was not brought into the sanctuary (Lev 10 16-20).
(ii) Purifications from uncleannesses required after childbirth a young pigeon or turtledove (Lev 12
2645 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Sacrifice (OT)
6-8). The leper must bring a guilt offering' (a special kind of sin offering), a he-lamb (Lev 14 12-14.19); if too poor for a lamb, a turtledove or young pigeon (vs 22.31). Special use of the blood is required (ver 25). In uncleanness from issues a sin offering of a turtledove or young pigeon must be offered by the priest (Lev 15 15.30).
sion is probable. These conscious sins are of a kind that will admit of full reparation because against rights of property or in money matters. The sin offering makes atonement toward God, the restitution with the additional one-fifth makes full reparation to man. No such reparation can be made with such sins described as committed with a "high hand." In the case of seduction, rights of property are violated (cf Nu 5 5-8; Dt 22 29).
(iii) On the Day of Atonement (Lev 16 1-28) Aaron must take a bullock for himself and house, two he-goats for the people, present the goats at the sanctuary, cast losts, one for Jeh, as a sin offering, the other for Azazel, to be sent into the wilderness. The bullock was killed, sweet incense was burned within the rail, blood was sprinkled on the mercy-seat and before it 7 times. The one he-goat was killed and a similar ceremony was performed. Blood must be put on the horns of the altar and sprinkled 7 t about it. The other goat was presented, hands were laid on it, the sins of all confessed and put upon the goat, and it was sent into the wilderness. The carcase of the bullock and hegoat were burned without the camp. At the feast of first-fruits a he-goat was offered (Lev 23 19).
(1) The ritual (Lev S 14—6 7).—A ram proportionate in value to tlie offence and worth at lea.st two shekels
is required. The ritual is probably the same as that of the sin offering, though no mention is made of the laying on of hands, and the blood is not brought into the sanctuary, but sprinkled about the base of the altar, the fat and inside parts being burned, and the flesh eaten by the priests in a holy place.
(2) Special statutes.—The leper, when cleansed, on the 8th day must bring a guilt offering of two helambs and one ewe-lamb ; the priest must wave one he-lamb before Jeh, kill it, and smear blood on the right ear, thumb and toe of the leper. The guilt offering belongs to the priest (Lev 14 12-20). If the leper were too poor for two lambs, one sufficed, with a corresponding meal offering, or one turtledove and a young pigeon (vs 21.22). The Nazirite,
(iv) Other special instances were: in the case of defilement, the Nazirite must offer a turtledove or young pigeon on the 8th day after contraction (Nu 6 10 ff ) ; when the days of the separation were
if defiled during his period of separation, must bring a he-lamb for a guilt offering (Nu 6 12). All guilt offerings were the priests' and most holy (18 9). The wave offerings were parts of the peace offerings, and the custom was seemingly initiated at the consecra-
fulfilled a ewe-lamb with the other offerings (ver 14) was to be offered; the twelve tribes included in each case a he-goat for sin offering (7 16 ff) ; at the consecration of the Levites a young bullock (8 8.12). For unwitting sins of the congregation a hegoat was to be offered (15 24.25). If one person erred, a she-goat was permitted (ver 27). A sin offering was required at the feast of the new moon (28 15), at the Passover (ver 22), at Pentecost (ver 30), on the 1st day of the 7th month
tion of Aaron and his sons (Ex 29 24—27), in XVflTTp when the breast and bread were waved iu. yytivc ijgfore Jeh. Lev 7 30..34 fixes the law. UliermgS it niust be brought from the peace offerings of the offerer himself. At Aaron's consecration Moses put the breast, etc, on Aaron's hands and waved them before Jeh (Lev 8 27). On the 8th day Aaron did the waving (Lev 9 21). The priests were to eat it in a clean place (Lev 10 14 f). The leper's he-lamb was to be waved by the priest, before being offered (Lev 14 12) ; the lamb of the guilt offering also (14 24). At the feast of flrst-frults the sheaf must be waved before Jeh (Lev 23 10.11.15); two loaves also (vs 17.20). Of the Nazirite the priest took the boiled shoulder, a cake and a wafer, put them on the Nazirite's hand and waved them before Jeh (Nu 6 19 f). Heave offerings also are parts of the peace offerings, and refer particularly to what is lifted up, or separated
(29 5), and on the 10th, 15th-22d days (vs 10-38). The ceremony of the red heifer (19 1-10.17) was a special sin offering for purification purposes only.
It was of ancient and primitive origin. The young cow was brought without the camp and was slain before the priest's face, blood was sprinkled 7 t be-
unto the service of Jeh. They are first
fore the sanctuary, the entire carcase with cedar wood, hyssop and scarlet was burned, the ashes gathered and laid without the camp in a clean place to be kept for the water of impurity. It was to purify after contact with the dead. In the case
1 1 TTpflvp mentioned at the consecration of Aaron i±. xicttvc ^g^ gg 27.28). The offering consisted of UnenngS the right shoulder or thigh and was the fixed due of the priest (Lev 7 32.34). One cake of the peace offering must be heaved (Lev 7 14). The offering must be eaten in a clean place (Lev 7 14) by the priest's family only (Lev 10 14.15). Of the Nazirite's offering the heave thigh also went to the priest
of the unknown homicide (Dt 21 1-9) a young unbroken heifer was brought to a running stream,
(Nu 6 20). When the Israehtes should come into the promised land to eat bread, they must offer a heave offering of the dough, a cake (Nu 15 19.20.21). The law is repeated in Nu 18 8.11.19, and the Levites are to receive a tithe of the heave offerings of tlie people (ver 24). They were in turn to offer up a tithe of this to the priests (vs 26-32). A portion of the spoil of Midian was a heave offering (31 29.41). Dt commands that all heave offerings be brought to the central sanctuary and eaten there (12 6.11).
its neck was broken, the elders washed their hands over the heifer in the presence of the priests, de-
claring their innocence. Thus the bloodshed was
expiated. The action was a judicial one, but essen-
tially vicarious and expiatory and had doubtless a
primitive origin.
The guilt offering (AV "trespass offering") (Lev
6 14—6 7) was a special kind of sin offering, always
Jacob poured oil on the stone he had set up (Gen 28 18) in honor of the Deity and consecrated the
of a private character and accompanied
9. The by a fine. It expressed expiation and
spot. Jacob later (Gen 35 14) set up
Guilt restitution. The classes of sin requir-
12. Drink a pillar where God had revealed Himself Offerings or and poured drink offerings and oil upon Libations it. Probably wine was used. Drink offerings accompanied many of the sac-
Offering ing a guilt offering with reparation in money are: (1) a trespass in the holy
things done unwittingly; (2) anything which the Law forbade depriving God or the priest of their due;
rifices (Ex 29 40.41). None could be poured upon the altar of incense (Ex 30 9). At all set feasts the drink offerings must be presented (Lev 23
(3) deahng falsely with a neighbor in a deposit, or
pledge, or robbery, or oppression; (4) swearmg
falsely regarding anything lost; (5) seduction of a
13.18.37). The Nazirite was not exempt (Nu 6
betrothed bondmaid (Lev 19 20-22). The first two
15.17). Wine and oil must accompany all votive and freewill offerings (15 4.5.7.10.24); the con-
of these are unwitting sins, the others cannot be. The clear statement is made in another place that
tinual burnt offering (28 7.8); sabbaths (vs 9.10) and all the other set feasts' (vs 14-31; 29 6-39, passim) . That drink offerings were common among the heathen is shown by Dt 32 38.
sins done with a "high hand," i.e. in rebeUion against
the covenant and its provisions, can have no sacri-
fice (Nu 15 30). Is this a contradiction, or a later development when it was found that the more
The cultus is thoroughly in keeping with and adapted to the age, and yet an ideal system in
stringent law would not work? (See J. M. P.
Smith, at al., Atonement, 47 f.) Neither conclu-
Sacrifice (OT) THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2646
many respects. The ethical side is in the background, the external has the emphasis. No sacrifices will avail for a breach of the covenant 13. Primibetween God and the people. The tive Nature people thoroughly believed in the effiof the cacy of the blood. It secured atoneCultus ment and forgiveness. Their religious
fat had been burned, or the flesh had been boiled
(2 13-17). This shows that such ritual as was prescribed in Lev was practised and considered by the people the only lawful custom. Was it in writing? Why not? Guilt offerings were made by the PhiUs when smitten by tumors (6 3.4.8.17). There were five golden mice and five golden tumors. Crude as were their ideas of a guilt offering, their actions show familiarity with the concept. Burnt offerings were used on special occasions and in great crises, such as receiving the ark (6 14 f), going to war (7 9f; 13 9-12), victory (11 15), etc. Saul met Samuel at a sacrificial feast in a small city (9 12.13) on a high place. At Gilgal there were burnt and peace offerings (10 8; 15 15.21). Saul offered burnt offerings himself (13 9-12), but his fault was not in offering them himself, but in his haste and disobedience toward Samuel. "To obey is better than sacrifice,"
life found expression in the sacrifices. God was fed and pleased by the offerings by fire. Many of the customs are ancient and crude, so that it is difficult to imagine how such a primitive system could have been arranged and accepted afterward by the people who had the lofty ethical teachings of the prophets in their hands.
VI. Sacrifices in the History of Israel.—The tribes were outwardly consolidated, and a religious
system was provided. Some of it was
1. The for the rulers, much for the people and Situation much for the priests alone. The variat Moses' ous laws were given in portions and Death afterward compiled. No one expected them to be observed until the nation had a capital and central sanctuary. Even then not every detail was always possible. They were not observed to any extent in the wilderness (Am 5 25), as it was impracticable. Even circumcision was neglected until the wanderers crossed the Jordan (Josh 5 2). The body of the system was not in full practice for 300 or 400 years. The ritual, as far as it could be observed, served as an educational agency, producing in the minds of the worshippers proper conceptions of the holiness of God, the sinfulness of man, and the proper spirit in approaching God.
etc, says Samuel (15 22), recognizing the fundamental principle of the covenant and realizing that ceremonies are in themselves worthless without the right spirit. The same truth is reiterated by the prophets later. To prevent the eating of flesh with the blood Saul built a special altar (14 32-35). Family and clan sacrifices and feasts were evidently common (16 2-5).
The common altars and those on the high places were still in use. The central sanctuary at ShOoh had been removed, first apparently to
6. In the Gilgal, then to Nob, and later to Days of Gibeon. David's and Saul's families David and kept the feast of the new moon, when Solomon peace offerings would be sacrificed (1 S 20 5.24-29). The sanctuary at Nob had the shewbread upon the table (21 4 ff) according to Ex 25 30. When the ark was brought up to Jerus, burnt and peace offerings were offered according to the Law (2 S 6 17.18; 1 Ch 16 2.40). Ahithophel offered private sacrifices at Shiloh (2 S 15 12). David offered up burnt, meal and peace offerings when purchasing the threshing-floor of Araunah
Lay or common altars were in accordance with Ex 20 24; Dt 16 21; 27 7. In the days of Joshua, the Passover was celebrated (Josh 5 2. In the 10 f). At Ebal an altar was erected. Time of burnt and peace offerings were preJoshua sented (Josh 8 30-32). The tabernacle was set up at Shiloh with a horned altar doubtless (Josh 18 1), and the cultus was observed to some extent. Concerning the altar on the east side of the Jordan, see Altar.
(1 Ch 21 23-26). The statutory horned altar at this time was at Gibeon (2 Ch 1 6; 1 Ch 21 29), but was soon removed to Jerus (1 Ch 22 1). In the organized sanctuary and ritual, Levites were appointed for attendance on the shewbread, meal offerings, burnt offerings, morning and evening sacrifices, sabbaths, new moons and set feasts (23 28-31), attempting to carry out the Levitical laws as far as possible. At the dedication of the temple Solomon offered burnt, meal and peace offerings in enormous quantities (1 K 8 63; 2 Ch 7 4-7); also burnt and peace offerings with incense triennially (1 K 9 25) . The ritual at the regular seasons, daily, sabbaths, new moons, set feasts, etc, was observed according to the Levitical Law (2 Ch 2 4; 8 13). Was it written? The golden calf worship was carried on at Dan and Beth-el, with priests, altars and ritual (1 K 12 27 f). The high places were in use, 6. lathe but very corrupt (13 2ff). A comNorthem mon altar was in use on Mt. Carmel Kingdom (18 30.32). Many others were known as Jeh's altars (19 10). The system was in full swing in Amos' time (Am 4 4.5) at Beth-el and Gilgal and probably at Beer-sheba (5 5). Amos bitterly satirizes the hollow, insincere worship, but does not condemn the common altars and sacrifices, as these were legitimate. With Hosea the situation is worse, the cultus has been "canonized," priests have been fed on the sin or sin offerings of the people, and the kingdom soon perished because of its corruption. The high places were still in use and not denounced yet by the prophets (1 K 3 2; 2 K 14 4; 15 4.35). Worship was not fully centrahzed, though tendmg m that du-ection. In the days of Abijah
Canaanitish altars were abundant with their corrupt and licentious cults of the Nature-gods. Israelites with their common altars 3. In the would naturally use the high places, Period of when possible. The stationary altars the Judges of the Canaanites were of course unlaw-
ful. The inevitable tendency would be to imitate the worship of the Canaanites. They were rebuked and threatened for this, and, weeping, offered sacrifices at Bochim (Jgs 2 1-5). Gideon rebuilt an altar of Jeh and offered a bullock as a burnt offering (6 2.5.26). The kid prepared for the angel was not first a sacrifice, but its acceptance as a gift was indicated by its being burned (6 19 f ) Jephthah offered up his daughter as a burnt offering, believing such a sacrifice well-pleasing to Jeh (11 31.39). Manoah and his wife prepared a kid for a burnt offering, a meal offering accompanying it (13 16 f). Atthetimeof the civil war with Benjamin the ark and statutory altar seemed to be at Beth-el, where they offered burnt and peace offerings (20 26). The feasts at Shiloh imply at least peace offerings
(21 19). Common lay altars and customary sacrifices were still much in use. The official altar with the statutory individual and national 4. In the offerings appears to be at Shiloh. ElTimes of kanah sacrifices and feasts there yearly Samuel (1 S 1 3f). Such feasts were joyand Saul ous and tended to excesses, as drunkenness .seemed common (1 13 f). All Israel came thither (2 14) ; the priests claimed their portion, seizing it in an unlawful manner before the
2647 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Sacrifice (OT)
the temple cult was in full operation according to Moses' Law (2 Ch 13 10 f). Asa removed many strange altars and high places because 7. In the of their corruption (14 3), but not all Southern (15 17; 20 33). In the days of JeKingdom to hoiada priests and Levites were on duty the Exile according to Moses (23 18; 24 14fc; 2 K 12 4-16). Sin and guilt offerings were in sufficient numbers to be mentioned, but the money went to the priests. Kautzsch (HDB, V) and Paterson (HDB, IV), with others, think these offerings were only fines and altogether different from those of Lev 4, 5. Such a statement is wholly gratuitous. The guilt offerings must be accompanied by fines, but not necessarily the sin offerings. The passage speaks of both as perfectly familiar and of long standing, but details are lacking and there can be no certainty in the matter, except that it proves nothing regarding a ritual of sin and guilt^offerings existent or non-existent at that time. Kautzsch's and Paterson's motives are obvious. Having reversed the history and put the ritual law late, they must needs make adjustments in the records to have them agree. In the days of Ahaz, the regular offerings were observed for priests, kings and people (2 K 16 13-15). Hezekiah destroyed many high places (18 4). When repairing the temple, many sin offerings were presented to expiate the terrible sins of the previous reigns and the desecration of the temple (2 Ch 29 21-24) ; and so, also, burnt offerings (vs 27 f), peace and thank offerings, etc, in large number (vs 31-3.5; cf Isa 1 10-17). The Passover was celebrated with peace offerings (2 Ch 30 1.2.15.22), oblations and tithes (31 12); courses of Levites were established (31 2), and the king's portion (ver 3). All the common altars were aboUshed as far as possible, and worship centralized in Jerus (32 12). Reversed by Manasseh (33 3f), the high places were again used (ver 17). Josiah purged Jerus (34 3), and on the discovery of the Book of the Law, with its rule regarding a central sanctuary, that law was rigidly enforced (35 6-14). The reformation under Josiah did not change the hearts of the people, and the rule followed in spite of aU the efforts of Jeremiah and other prophets.
of Elephantine in the Nile. It was built by a Jewish military colony, and a system of sacrifices was observed.
Just how far they copied the laws of Moses. q A Xpmnlp "'^'^ what were their ideas of a central
H Q • sanctuary are uncertain. and bacriSeveral Sem tribes or nations practised fices at Elehuman sacrifices. It was common among Dhantine ^^^ Canaanitcs, as is shown by the exca- '^ vations at Gezer, Taanach, etc. They seemed to offer children in sacrifice at the laying of cornerstones of houses and other such occasions. Among the Carthaginians, Phoenicians. Greeks and Romans human sacrifices were all too in TTiiman common. Thecustom was not unknown to lu. numcm ^jjg Israelites. Abraham felt called ui>on oacriflces to offer up Isaac, but was stopped in the in Israel's ^ct, and a lesson was given for all time.
TTict/^rif '^^^ abominable practice is forbidden by nisiory Moses (Lev 18 21), where it is spoken of as a passing through the fire to Moloch, referring to Moaijitish and Ammonitish practices. Anyone practising it was to be stoned (Lev 20 2-5; Dt 12 31; 18 10). The rash vow of Jephthah resulted in the immolation of his daughter, but the incident is recorded as something e.xtraordinary (Jgs 11 .31 f). The execution of Zebah and Zalmunna is a case of blood revenge, not sacrifice (8 18 fl). Nor is the slaughter of Agag in any sense a sacrifice (1 ,S 15 32 f). The death of Saul's sons because of his breach of covenant with the Gibeonites was an expiatory sacrifice, to atone for the father's perfidy (2 S 21 9). The Moabite king in desperation offered up his firstborn and heir to appease the anger of Chemosh, and the effect was startling to the Israelites (2 K 3 27). Ahaz practised the abomination in times of trouble (16 3). Such sacrifices were intended to secure favor with the Deity or appease His wrath. Kiel's firstborn and youngest sons were probably sacrificed at the rebuilding or fortifying of Jericho (1 K 16 34; cf Josh 6 26). Manasseh practised the custom (2 K 21 6), but it was stopped by Josiah (23 10). Micah's words were probably apphcable to those times of Ahaz or Manasseh, when they thought to obtain God's favor by costly gifts apart from ethical conditions (Mic 6 6-8). Isaiah refers to a heathen custom practised by Israel of slaying the children in secret places (Isa 57 5), and Jeremiah represents it as practised in his time (Jer 7 31; 19 .5). Ezekiel denounces the same practice (Ezk 16 20.21; 23 37).
Heathen sacrifices are hinted at in the later books, such as swine, a mouse, a horse, a dog (Isa 65 4; 66 3.17; Ezk 8 10; 2 K 23 11). All such ani11. Certain nials were unclean to the Hebrews, and the
TTpfltVipn practice had its roots in some form of jxeaineu primitive totemism which survived in those Sacrifices heathen cults. They were little practised among the Israelites. See Totemism.
VII. The Prophets and Sacrifices.—The prophets were reformers, not innovators. Their emphasis was on the ethical, rather than the ritual. They based their teachings on the fundamentals of the covenant, not the incidentals. They accepted sacrifices as part of the reUgious hfe, but would give them their right place. They accepted the law regarding common altars, and Samuel, David and Elijah used these altars. They also endorsed the movement toward a central sanctuary, but it is the abuse of the cult that they condemned, rather than
That the cultus was entirely suspended in Jerus from 586 to 536 BC seems certain. There is no support for G. F. Moore's statement
8. In the (EB, IV) that an altar was soon reExihc and built and sacrificing was carried on Post-exiUc with scarcely a break. On the return Periods of the exiles an altar was soon built and the continual burnt offerings began (Ezr 3 2 f), and likewise at the Feast of Tabernacles, new moons and set feasts (vs 4-7). Darius decreed that the Israelites should be given what was needed
its use. They combated the heathenish idea that
all God needed was gifts, lavish gifts, and would condone any sin if only they bestowed abundance of gifts. They demanded an inward religion, moral-
for the sacrifices (6 9f). The band under Ezra
ity, justice, righteousness, in short, an ethical religion. They preached an ethical God, rather than the profane, debasing and almost blasphemous idea of God which prevailed in their times. They reminded the people of the covenant at Sinai, the foundation principle of which was obedience and loyalty to Jeh. If Joel be early, the cult is in full practice, as he deplores the cutting-off of the meal offering, or minhdh, and the ne^ekh or drink offering, through the devastation of the locusts. He does not mention the burnt offerings, etc, as these would not be cut off by the locusts (Joel 1 7.13; 2 14). Joel emphasized the need for a genuine rei)entance, telling them to rend their hearts and not their garments (2 13). Amos condemns the cultus at Bcth-el and Gilgal, and sarcastically bids them go on transgressing
offered many sin offerings on their return (8 35). At the dedication of the temple many burnt and
sin offerings were made for all the tribes (6 17). Those who had married foreign wives offered guilt
offerings (10 19). The firman of Artaxerxes provided money for bullocks, rams, lambs, with meal and drink offerings (7 17). Under Nehemiah and
after the formal acceptance of the Law, a more com-
plete effort was made to observe it. The shew-
bread, continual burnt and meal offerings, sabbaths, new moons, set feasts, sin offerings, first-fruits,
firsthngs, first-fruits of dough, heave offerings of all
trees, wine and oil, etc, were carefully attended
to (Neh 10 33-37) and were in full force later
(13 5.9). There is no hint of innovation, only a thoroughgoing attempt to observe laws that had been somewhat neglected.
(4 4.5), mentions burnt, peace, thank and freewill offerings (4 4 f ; 5 22), reminds them of the fact that they did not offer sacrifices in the wilderness (5 25),
At the time of Nehemiah and probably two or tliree centuries previous, there existed a temple on the island
Sacrifice (OT) THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2648
the fragment of the ritual that was broken up in the exile. But his references to Ihe burnt, sin and
but demands rather righteousness and justice. There
is nothing liere against the Mosaic origin of the laws.
trespass offerings presuppose familiaritv with them
In Hosea's time the hollow externalism of the cult had become worse, while vice, falsehood, murder, oppression, etc, were rampant. He utters an epochmaking sentence when he says, "I desire mercy, and not sacrifice," etc (6 6). This is no sweeping renunciation of sacrifices, as such; it is only putting the emphasis in the right place. Such sacrifices as Hosea speaks of were worse than worthless. It is somewhat extravagant for Kautzsch to say, "It
(40 38-42).
He assigns tlio nortli and .soiitli chambers for tlie meal, sin and trespass ofterings (42 13). The cleansing of the altar requires a bullock and he-goat for a sin offering, ivith burnt and peace offerings with a ritual similar to Lev 8 If (Ezk 43 18-27). The Levites are to be ministers and slay burnt offerings and sacrifice for the people
(44 11). The priest must offer his sin offering before he ministers in the sanctuary (44 27). They are to eat the meal, sin, and trespass offerings as in 44 29. In ch 45 the people are to give the wheat, barley, oil and lambs for meal, burnt and peace offerings, while the prince shall give the meal, biirnt and drink offerings for
is perfectly futile to read out of 6 6 anything else than a categorical rejection of sacrifices." Hosea recognizes their place in religion, and deplores the loss during exile (3 4). The corrupt cults he condemns (4 13 f), for the}' are aa bad as the Canaan-
tlie feasts, the new moons, sabbaths and appointed feasts. He is to prepare them to make atonement (45 13-17). In cleansing the sanctuary the Levitical ritual is followed with added details (45 18-20). The Passover requires the burnt, sin and meal offerings with an extra amount of cereal. The priests prepare the prince's burnt and peace offerings (46 2-4.6.9-12) for the sabbaths, new moons, etc. The daily burnt offerings (vs 13-15) must have a sixth instead of a tenth part of an ephah, as in Lev 1. The sin and guilt offerings are to be boiled in a certain place, and the meal offering baked (vs 20.26). Ezk varies from the Levitical Law in the quantity of the meal offering, picturing the ritual in a more ideal situation than Moses. The people are all righteous, with new hearts, the Spirit in them enabling them to keep the Law (36 26 f ) , and j'et he institutes an elaborate ritual of purification for them. Does this seem to indicate that the prophets would abolish sacrifices entirely ? It is strange reasoning which makes the prophets denounce the whole sacrificial system, when one of the greatest among them seeks to conserve an elaborate cult for the blessed age in tlie future.
itish cults (4 9). Jeh will spurn them (8 13; 9 4). The defection of the nation began earlv (11 2), and they have multiplied altars (12 11;" 13 2). He predicts the time when they shall render as bullocks the "calves" of their lips (14 2 AV).
Micah is as emphatic. The sacrifices were more costly in his day, in order the more surely to purchase the favor of the Deity. Human sacrifices were in vogue, but Micah says God requires them "to do justly, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with thy God" (6 8). This does not in the least affect sacrifices of the right kind and with the right spirit.
Isaiah faces the same situation. There are multitudes of sacrifices, burnt offerings, blood of bullocks and goats, oblations, sweet incense, beasts, etc, but no justice, morality, love, truth or goodness. Thus their sacrifices, etc, are an abomination, though right in themselves (1 11-17; 61 8). The same is true of all pious performances today.
In the second part of Isa, God declares that He has not been honored by the people with burnt and meal offerings, etc., and that He has not burdened them with such offerings, but that He is wearied with their sins (43 23 f). Those foreigners who respect the covenant shall offer acceptable sacrifices (56 7) in the blessed age to come. The Servant of Jeh ts to be a guilt offering (53 10) to expiate the sins of Israel. Sacrifice is here for the first time lifted out of the animal to the human sphere, thus forging the link between the OT and the NT. In the glorious age to come there are to be priests and Levites, new moons, sabbaths and worsliip in Jerus (66 21.23). Daniel speaks of the meal offering being caused to cease in the midst of the week (9 27). Zechariah pictures the golden age to come when all nations shall go up to Jerus to keep the Feast of Tabernacles, which implies sacrifices. Pots are used, and ail the worshippers shall use them in the ritual (14 16-21).
It is probable that Isaiah worshipped in the temple
(6 1.6). In his eschatological vision there is freedom to offer sacrifices in Egypt (19 19.21). The people are to worship in the holy mountain (27 13). Ariel must let the feasts come around (29 1). Jeremiah maintains the same attitude. Your "frankincense from Sheba, and the sweet cane," burnt offerings and sacrifices are not pleasing to God (6 20; 14 12). They made the temple a den of robbers, in the streets they baked cakes to the Queen of heaven, etc. He speaks sarcastically, saying, "Add your burnt-offerings unto your sac-
In Malachi's age the ritual was in practice, but grossly abused. They offered polluted bread (1 7), blind, lame and sick animals (1 13 f). Jeh has the same attitude toward these as toward those in the times of Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah (Mai 1 10 f). The Gentiles offer better ones (1 11). The Israel-
rifices, and eat ye flesh. For I spake not unto your fathers .... concerning .... sacrifices: but .... commanded .... saying. Hearken unto my voice," etc (7 21-23). This was literally true, as we have seen above; the covenant was not based on sacrifices but on obedience. Such a statement docs not deny the institution of sacrifices for those within the covenant who are obedient. It is no "subterfuge," as Kautzsch calls it, "to say that the prophets never polemize against sacrifice per se, but only against offerings presented hypocritically, without repentance and a right disposition, with blood-stained hands ; against the opera operata of the carnally-minded, half-heathen mass of the people." This is exactly what they do, and thej' are in perfect harmony with the covenant constitution and with their own ethical and spiritual functions. Kautzsch can make such an extravagant assertion only by ignoring the fact that Jeremiah himself in predicting the future age of righteousness and blessedness makes sacrifice an important factor (33 11.18). Picturing possible prosperity and glory, Jeremiah speaks of burnt and meal offerings, frankincense, thank offerings, etc, being brought into the house
ites covered the altar of Jeh with tears by their hypocritical, non-ethical actions (2 13). They robbed God in withholding tithes and heave offerings (3 8). It is the abuse of the cult that is denounced here, as in all the other Prophets.
A special use of the term "sacrifice" is made by Zephaniah (1 7 f), applying it to the destruction of Israel by Jeh. Bozrah and Edom are to be victims (Isa 34 6); also Gog and Magog (Ezk 39 17.19). In summing up the general attitude of the prophets toward sacrifices, even G. F. Moore in EB admits: "It is not probable that the prophets distinctly entertained the idea of a religion without a cultus, a purely spiritual worship. Sacrifice may well have seemed to them the natural expression of homage and gratitude." He might have added, "and of atonement for sin, and full fellowship with God."
Vm. Sacrifice in the "Writings."—Dates are very uncertain here. The Pss and Prov extend from David and Solomon into the Pers period.
The sages take the same attitude as the prophets. They enjoin the sacrifice of first-fruits (Prov 3 9). A feast usually follows a sacrifice of
of Jeh (17 26). (We are aware of the harsh and arbitrary transference of this passage to a later time.)
1. In the peace offerings (7 14). The trespass Proverbs offering (?) has no meaning to fools (14 9), and the sacrifices of the wicked are an abomination to God (15 8; 21 27). Right-
Ezekiel is called by Kautzsch "the founder of the Levitical system." He is said to have preserved
2649 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Sacrifice (OT)
eousness and justice are more acceptable to Jeh than sacrifices (21 3), yet to them sacrifices are a regular part of worship. Koheleth spealis of sacrifices as quite the custom, and deprecates the offerings of fools (Eccl 5 1; 9 2). The Psalmist admonishes the faithful to offer the sacrifices of righteousness, i.e. sacrifices offered in the right spirit (4 5). The drink 2. In the offerings of idolaters are well known Psalms (16 4). Prayer is made for the ac- .ceptanoe of sacrifices (20 3). It is a coveted privilege to offer them (27 6; 84 1-4). The true relation between sacrifice and obedience
The burnt and sin offerings were the principal kinds used for the purpose of purification; water being used in case of uncleanness from
3. A Means contact with the dead. There were of Purifithree classes of uncleanness: (1) those cation from inseparable from the sex functions of Uncleanmen and women; (2) those resulting ness from contact with a corpse; (3) the case of recovery from leprosy. Purification ceremonies were the condition of such persons enjoying the social and religious life of the community. Why they should require a sin offering when most of them occurred in the regular course of nature and could not be guarded against, can be understood only as we consider that these offences were the effects of sin, or the weaknesse.s of the fleshly nature, due to sin. Such uncleannesses made the subject unfit for society, and that unfitness was an offence to God and required a piacular offering.
is expressed in 40 6-8. As in Jer 7 21 f, the emphasis is laid on obedience, without which sacrifices are worthless and repugnant to God. They are not the important thing in Israel's religion, for that religion coald exist without them as in the wilderness and exile. The teaching corresponds exactly with that of the prophets and is probably late. Ps 50 is even more emphatic. The Psalmist knows that sacrifices are in the covenant regulations (ver 5), but repudiates the idea of giving anything to Gocl or of feeding Him (vs 12.13). Everything belongs to Him, He is not hungry, He would scorn the idea of drinking the blood of goats, etc. The idea of the cultus being of any real value to God is scouted. Yet in the next verse the reader is admonished to offer sacrifices of thanksgiving and pay vows (ver 14). The sacrifices that express worship, penitence, prayer, thanksgiving and faith are acceptable. The penitent Psalmist speaks in similar terms. Sacrifices as such are no delight to God, the real sacrifice is a broken heart (51 16 f) . When the heart
Consecration was of men and things. The ceremonies at the seahng of the covenant and the con-
secration of the Ijcvites and of Aaron 4. A Means and his sons have been mentioned. of ConseThe altar and furniture of the tabercration to nacle were consecrated by the blood the Divine of the sin offering. This blood being Service the means of expiation, it cleansed from
all defilement caused by human hands, etc. The sprinkling and smearing of the blood consecrated them to the service of God. The blood being holy, it sanctified all it touched (cf Ezk 45 19 f). In other words, it is a kind of sacral communion. The blood is the sacred cement between man and
is right, then, as an expression of true-heartedness, devotion, repentance and faith, burnt offerings are highly acceptable (ver 19). Another Psalmist promises a freewill offering to God (54 6; 66 13.
God. This is possible only because
5. To Esit contains the life and is appropriated tablish a by God as a symbol of the communion Community into which He enters with the offerer. of Life This blood "covers" all sin and debetween filement in man, permits him to enter Worshipper God's presence and attests the oomand God munion with Him. This is the view of Schultz, and partly that of Kautzsch, in regard to earlier ideas of sacrifice. Such a view may have been held by certain peoples in primitive times, but it does not do justice to the Levitical system.
1.5). Sacrifices of thanksgiving are advised (96 8; 107 22; 118 27) and promised (116 17). Prayer
is likened to the evening sacrifice (141 2). IX. The Idea and Efficacy of Sacrifices.—That the Hebrews thoroughly beheved in the efficacy of sacrifices is without doubt. What ideas they entertained regarding them is not so clear. No single theory can account for all the facts. The unbloody sacrifices were regarded as food for the Deity, or a pleasant odor, in one instance, taking the place of a bloody offering (see above). The bloody offerings present some difficulties, and hence many different views.
The view o( Ritschl is tliat sacrifices served as a form of self-protection from God whose presence meant de-
struction to a weali creature. Thus sacri6 View of ^'^^^ have no moral value and no relation
Tj'., ., to sin and defilement. They have relation lULSCnx only to man's creaturely weakness which is in danger of destruction as it approaches the presence of God. God's presence necessarily meant death to the creature without reference to his holiness, etc. Such a view banishes all real sense of sin, all ethical values, and furnishes no proper motives. It gives a false idea of the character of God, and is entirely out of accord with the sacred record.
Included under the head of gifts of food to the Deity would be the meal and peace offerings, in so
far as they were consumed by fire,
1. A Gift the burnt offerings and the shewbread,
of Food to etc. They were fire-food, the firethe Deity distilled essence or etherealized food
for God which gave Him pleasure and disposed Him favorably toward the offerer. They were intended either to appease wrath, to win favor,
That sacrifices were really a sacrament has been advocated by many. According to some theologians, the sacrifices were signs of spirit7. Sacrifice ual realities, not only representing but a Sacrasealing and applying spiritual blessings, ment and their eflicacy was proportionate to the faith of the offerer. By some Roman Catholic theologians it is held that the Passover was esp. of a sacramental character, corresponding to the Eucharist. The purificatory rites corresponded to penance and the consecrating sacrifices to the sacrament of ordination. Biihr says that the acceptance of the sacrifice by Jeh and His gift of sanctification f o the worshippers give to the sacrifice the character of a sacramental act. Cave also speaks of them as having a sacramental significance, while refuting the position of Bahr. Though there may be a slight clement of truth in some of these ideas, it is not the idea expressed in the cultus, and seems to read into the ritual the
or to express thanks and gratitude for favors ex-
perienced. The earher and more naive idea was probably to win the favor of the Deity by a gift.
Later, other ideas were expressed in the offerings.
The burnt offering best gave expression to the sentiments of adoration and devotion, though they
may not be excluded from the meal
2. Expresand peace offerings. In other words,
sion of sacrifice meant worship, which is a Adoration complex exercise of the soul. Such and was Abraham's attempted sacrifice of Devotion Isaac. The daily burnt offerings were intended to represent an unbroken course of adoration and devotion, to keep the right
relations with the Deity. On particular occasions,
special offerings were made to insure this relation which was specially needed at that time.
Sacrifice (OT) Sacrifice (NT) THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2650
gift can please God only as the gift of one who has given himself up to Him; therefore the ritual must represent this self-surrender, the hfe of the clean and guiltless animal in place of the impure and
theology of the theologians themselves. This view
is closely allied to a phase of the following view
(see Paterson, HDB, IV).
That it is a symbol or expression of prayer is held by Maurice and to some extent b}' Schultz. Thus the sacrifices are supposed to be sym-
sinful soul of the offerer, and this pure soul, coming
in between the offerer and the Holy God, lets Him
8. A Symbols of the rehgious sentiment, which bol or Exare the conditions of acceptance with pression of God. The victim serves as an index Prayer of what is in the worshipper's heart, and its virtue is exhausted when it is presented to God. Thus it may express spiritual aspiration or supplication, hatred of sin and surrender to God with confession and supplication. Bahr holds that a valuable and unblemished victim
see at the altar a pure life by which the impure hfe
is covered. In the same way the pure element serves to cover the pollutions of the sanctuary and the altar, etc. Its meaning is specific, it is the self-
sacrifice of the offerer vicariously accomplished. This self-sacrifice necessarily involves suffering and punishment, which is inflicted on the beast to which the guilt and sin are imputed, not imparted (see Oehler, or Theol.,278i).
is selected as symbolical of the excellence and purity to which the offerer aspires, the death is necessary to procure life which may be offered to God, and the sprinklins of the blood is the presentation to God of the life still resident in the blood. Schultz thinks that the sin offering was distinctively purifying. "Hence the real ground of purification is that God accepts the sacrifice and thereby
Objections have been raised by Dillmann, Kautzsch and others on the ground that it could not have been vicarious because sacrifices were not aUowed for sins which merited death, but only for venial transgressions (Nu 15 30). Certainly, but the entire sacriflcial system was for those who were in the covenant, who did not commit sins that merited death, and was never intended as a penal substitute, because the sins of those in the covenant were not of a penal nature. The sacrifices were "to cover" the sin and defilement of the offerer, not the deserved death-penalty of one who broke the covenant. Again, they object, a cereal offering may atone, and this excludes a penal substitute. But sacrifices were not strictly penal, and the cereal was distinctly an exception in case of the very poor, and the exception proves the rule. In any case it represented the self-sacriflce of the offerer, and that was the important thing. Further, the victim was slain by the offerer and not by the priest, whereas it sliould have been put to death by God's representative. This carries no weight whatever, as the essential thing was a sacriflce, and priests were not necessary for that. A more serious objection is that in the case of penal substitution, by wliich the sin and guilt are transferred to the animal, the flesh of that animal is regarded as most holy and to be eaten by the priests only, whereas it would necessarily be regarded as laden with guilt and curse, and hence polluted and unfit for use. This is a pure assumption. In the first place, the substitution was not strictly penal, and, secondly, there is no hint that actual pollution is conveyed to the iiesh of the animal or to the blood. Even if it were so, the shedding of the blood would expiate the sin and guilt, wipe out the pollution, and the flesh would be in no way affected. On the contrary, the fiesh, having been the vehicle for the blood which has accomplished such a sacred and meritorious service, would necessarily be regarded as most holy. All the animal would be holy, rather than polluted, since it had performed such a holy service. Kautzsch's objection thus appears puerile. The ritual of the Day of Atonement presents all these features. It is distinctly stated that the high priest confesses the iniquities of the children of Israel over the scapegoat, and tiiat the goat carries this guilt away to the desert. Its blood is not shed, it is wholly unclean, and the man leading it away is unclean. This is undeniably a vicarious act. In the case of the other goat, a sin offering, the sin and guilt are imputed to it, but the life is taken and thus the expiation is made and the flesh of the victim used in such a holy service is most holy.
enters into communion with the sinner, granting him actual pardon, and that man in this offering enjoined by God as the embodied prayer of a penitent expresses his confession, his regrets and his petition for forgiveness." While there is an element of truth in this, and it is particularly applicable to the burnt offering, it does not embrace all the facts.
It represents the views of the prophets and psalm-
ists more than that of the Levitical code.
Kautzsch holds that the efficacy of sacrifices consists in this; "God lias connected the accomplishment of atonement with the obedient discharge of 9 View of ^^® sacrificial prescriptions; whoever ful-
.jj , fils these and gets the priest to perform tlie Js.autzscll atoning usage.s, is forgiven. Tlie ritual, &sp. the presenting of tile blood, istheindispensable condition of atonement, but it is not synonymous. Forgiveness of sin flows from the ^race of God as taught by the prophets, only with them it is unnecessary, but with the PC it is necessary." Thus Kautzsch teaches a fundam'ental contradiction between the prophets and the Law, which is utterly wrong and is made necessary by first turning the history upside down and making the PC a hideous anachronism. He says, "That tlie process of atonement is connected with the presenting of blood, explains itself naturally as a powerful after-influence of primitive sacrificial usages, in which the presenting of blood had a different meaning. It is a symbohc (not real) satisfaction, as through the animal's
li'fe symbolic expression is given to the fact that the sinner's life is forfeited to God. But tlie main idea is that God has commanded it" (H DB, Y ,721a). The half-truths in these statements will be obvious to most readers.
The theory that sacrifices were a vicarious expiation of sin and defilement, by a victim whose life
That this view of a vicarious expiation was generally accepted is evident on every hand. There was no need of a theoretical explanation in the cultus; it was self-evident; as Holtzmann says, "the most external indeed, but also the simplest and most generally intelligible and the readiest answer to the natureof expiation" {NT Theol., I, 68). This view is amply corroborated by the researches of S. I, Curtiss in his Primitive Sem Religion of Today. By searching questions he found that the fundamental idea of bloody sacrifices was that the victim took the place of the man, redeemed him, or atoned for him as a substitute. The "bursting forth of the blood" was the essential thing (see pp. 218 f).
is forfeited instead of the sinner's, is
10. Vicarithe only one that will complete the ous ExLevitical idea of sacrifices. This of piation course applies esp. to the sin offering. Theory While there is an element of truth in the gift-theory, the praj'er and sacramental theories and others, including that of Kautzsch, the idea of a vicarious suffering is necessary to complete the conception. Oehlcr recognizes the force of the prayer-theory, but advances to the idea that in sacrifices man places the life of a pure, innocent, sacrificial animal between himself and God, because he is unable to approach God on account of his sinfulness and impurity. Thus it becomes a kopher for him, to cover his sin. This
The typology of sacrifice has been much discussed. 'There can be no question that, from the
is not a punishment inflicted on the animal, although
standpoint of the NT, many of the 11. Typolsacrifices were typical. They preogy of figured, and designedly so, the great Sacrifice sacrifice of Christ. Thus they could not really take away sin; they were in that sense unreal. But the question is, were they typical to the people of Israel? Did Moses and the priests and prophets and people understand that
in the case of uncertain homicide it is (Dt 21 1-9). The law does not lay tlie emphasis upon the slaughter, but on the shedding of the blood and the sprinkling of it on certain articles. The slaughter
is of course presupposed. The all ar is not regarded
as a placeof execution, it is themcansfor "covering" the sins of the covenant people, a gracious ordinance of God and well-pleasing to Him. But the
Sacrifice (OT) Sacrifice (NT)
2651 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA
/. Terms of Sacrifice Epitomized.—The word "offering" (Trpo(T(fiop<x, prosphord) describes the death of Christ, once in P-aul (Eph 5 2); 5 t in He (10 5.8.10.14.18). The vb. jTpo<Ti^epa), prosphf'ro, "to offer," is also used, 15 t in He (5 1.3; 8 32.3.4; 9 7.14.25.28; 10 1.8.11.12; 11 4). The noun prosphora occurs 15 t in LXX, usually as the tr of nns^j. minhah, "sacrifice." This noun in
they were merely figures, adumbrations of the true Sacrifice to come, which alone could take away sin? Did they understand that their Messiah was to be sacrificed, His blood shed, to make an atonement for them, and render their Divinely given means of atonement all unreal ? The answer must be an emphatic "No." There is no hint that their minds were directed to think of the Coming One as their sacrifice, foreshadowed by their offerings. That was the one thing the nation could not and would not understand, and to this day the cross is their chief stumbling-block. The statement that the Servant
the NT refers to OT sacrifices in Acts 7 42; 21 26; to the ofrcring of money in Acts 24 17; Rom l5 16. The vl). (ii'n<|>epuj, anaphrro, also occurs 3 t in He (7 27; 9 28; 13 15); also in 1 Pet 2 5. The word "sacrifice" (t^vaia. thusia, translates in LXX 8 Heb words for various kinds of sacrifice, occurring about 350 t) refers to Christ's death, once in Paul (Eph 5 2) and 5 t in He (5 1; 9 23.20; 10 12.26). It refers
several times to OT sacrifice and 5 t to Christian living or giving (Phil 2 17; 4 18; He 13 15.16; 1 Pet 2 5). The vi>. "to sacrifice" (0uu>, thud) is used once by Paul to describe Christ's death (1 Cor 6 7). The blood {a.\ti.a., haima) of Christ is said to secure redemption or salvation, 6 t in Paul (Rom 3 25; 5 9; 1 Cor 10 16; Eph 1 7; 2 13; Col 1 20) ; 3 t in He (9 12.14; 10 19; ct also 10 29); 2 t in 1 Pet (1 2.19) and 5 t in the Johannine writings (1 Jn 1 7; 5 6^.8; Rev 1 5) . Unmistakably this figure of the blood refers to Christ's sacrificial death. "In any case the phrase kv Tw auToy a'l^aTt. [ea td auiou haimati, 'in his blood,' Rom 3 25] carries with it the idea of sacrificial bloodshedding" (Sanday, Comm. on Ep. to Rom, 91).
is to be a guilt offering (Isa 53 10) is the nearest approach to it, but this is far from saying that the whole sacrificial system was understood as foreshadowing that event. The great prophets all speak of a sacri-
ficial system in full vogue in the Messianic age. We prefer to regard the sacrificial system as a great religious educational system, adapted to the capacity of the people at that age, intended to develop right conceptions of sin, proper appreciation of the holiness of God, correct ideas of how to approach God, a familiarity with the idea of sacri-
AuTpoi- {lutron, "ransom," the price paid for redeeming, occurring in LXX 19 t, meaning the price paid for redeeming the servant [Lev 25 51.52]; ransom for firstborn [Nu 3 46] ; ransom for the life of the owner of the goring ox [E.x 21 30, etc]) occurs in tlie NT only twice (Mt 20 28; Mk 10 45). This word is used by Jesus to signify the culmination of His sacrificial life in His sacrificial death.
fice as the fundamental thing in redemption, life, and service to God and man.
Literature.—Only a selection is attempted: arts, in Enc Brit, nth ed; EB (G. F. Moore); UDB (Paterson); RE and Sc/i-Herz (Orelli); Jew Enc: McClintock and Strong, etc; INIurray's Bible Diet.; Standard BD, etc. Kautzsch, Jastrow and Wiedermann in HDB: art. on "Comparative Religion" in Sch-Herz: OT Theologies of Oehler, Dillmann. Sraend, Schultz. Davidson, Koenig, etc. On sacrifices in general: Wellhausen, Re^te des arabisehen Heidenthums; W. R. Smith. Religion of the Semites; 3. G. Frazer, Golden Bough, II, III; E. B. Tylor, Primitive Culture; E. Westermarck, Origin of Moral Ideas; H. Hubert ct iVIauss, Annee sociologique, II; L. Maril-
'Ai'TtAuTpof (antilutron, "ransom," a word not found in LXX, stronger in meaning than the preceding word) occurs only once in the NT (1 Tim 2 6). 'ATToAuTpojcTLy (apolutrosis, "redemption," in Ex 21 8. meaning the ransom paid by a father to redeem his daughter from a cruel master) signifies (1) deliverance from sin by Clirist's death, 5 t in Paul (Rom 3 24; 1 Cor
1 30; Eph 1 7.14; Col 1 14); once in He (9 15); (2) general deliverance, twice (Lk 21 28; He 11 35); (3) the Christian's final deliverance, physical and spiritual (Rom 8 23; Eph 4 30). The simple word AiJTpwo-ts ilutrosis, "redemption," 10 t in LXX as the tr of 5 Heb words) occurs once for spiritual deliverance (He 9 12). 'E^ayopa^w {exagordzo, "redeem," only once in LXX, Dnl 2 8) in the NT means (1) to deliver from the curse of the law, twice by Paul (Gal 3 13; 4 5); (2) to use time wisely, twice by Paul (Eph 5 18; Col 4 5). The simple vb. ayopd^'w {agordzij, meaning in Lev 27 19 to redeem land) occurs twice in Paul (1 Cor 6 20; 7 23) and means "to redeem" (in a spiritual sense). KarnAAav^ (katallagf, " reconciUation," only twice in LXX) means the relation to God into which men are brought by Christ's death, 4 t by Paul (Rom 5 11; 11 15; 2 Cor 5 18.19). KaTa\\d(Ta-€Lv {katalldssein, "to reconcile," 4 t in LXX [3 in 2 Mace]) means to bring men into the state of reconciliation with God. 5 t in Paul (Rom 5 10 bis; 2 Cor 5 18.19.20). The words with the propitiatory idea occur as follows:
lier, Revue de Vhistoire des religions, XXXVI, 208; S. I. Curtiss, Primitive Sem Religion of Today.
Biblical sacrifices: F. Bahr, Symbolik des Mosdischen Kultus; J. H. Kurtz, Der alttestamentliche Opfercultus; A. Stewart, The Mosaic Sacrifices; J. G. Murphy, Sac-
rifice as Set Forth in Scripture; A. Cave, Scriptural Doctrine of Sacrifice; F. Maurice, The Doctrine of Sacrifice;
J. M. P. Smith, Bib. Doctrine of Atonement. See also: Schultz. AJT, 1900, 2.57 (f ; Smoller, Studien und Kritiken, 1891; Wiener, Essays in Pentateuchal Criticism; Pentateuchal Studies; Driver, ERE, VI. t t -n J. J. Reeve
In the New Testament
I. Terms of Sacrifice Epitomized
II. Attitude of Jesus and NT Writers to the OT Sacrificial System
1. Jesus' Attitude 2. Paul's Attitude 3. Attitude of the Author of Hebrews III. The Sacrificial Idea in the NT
l\aaKOfj.o.t (hildskomai, "to propitiate," 12 tin LXX, trd "to forgive") occurs twice (Lk 18 13; He 2 17); iXaiTnoi (hilasmds. 9 t in LXX, Nu 5 8; Ps 129 [130] 4, etc; "atonement," "forgiveness") occurs twice in 1 Jn
1. Teaching of John the Baptist
2. Teaching of Jesus
3. Teaching of Peter 4. Paul's Teaching 5. Teaching of Hebrews
(2 2; 4 10); iAao-rijptoi' {hilast^rion, 24 tin LXX, translates "mercy-seat," where God was gracious and spake to man) translates in the NT "propitiation" (Rom 3 25), "mercy-seat" (He 9 5). Christ is called "the Lamb," d^ti'd^, amnds, twice by the Baptist (Jn 1 29.36) ; once by Philip apphed to Christ from Isa 53 7 (Acts 8 32); and once by Peter
6. Johannine Teaching IV. Relation of Christ's Sacrifice to Man's Salvation 1. Redemption or Deliverance from Curse of Sin
2. Reconciliation 3. Remission of Sins 4. The Cancellation of Guilt
(1 Pet 1 19); dipi'.ov, arnion. 28 t in Rev (5 6.8.12.13; 6 1.16; 7 9.10.14; 19 7.9; 21 9.14.22.23.27; 22 1.3). The cross (crTaupds, staurds) is used by Paul 10 t to describe the sacrificial death of Christ (1 Cor 1 17.18; Gal 5 11; 6 12.14; Eph 2 16: Phil 2 8; 3 IS; 1 Cor
5. Justification or Right Standing with God
6. Cleansing or Sanctiflcation
7. Sonship ^ V. How Christ's Sacrifice Procures Salvation
1 20; 2 14) and once by the author of He (12 2). Jesus also 5 t used tlie figure of tlie cross to define the life of sacriflco demanded of His disciples and to make His own cross the symbol of sacrifice (Mt 10 38; 16 24; Mk 8 34; Lk 9 23; 14 27, with contexts; cf Jn 3 14; 12 32, etc). Though it is not our province in this article to
1. Jesus' Teaching 2. Paul's Teaching 3. Teaching of Hebrews
4. Petrine and Johannine Teaching VI. Rationale of the Efficacy of Christ's Sacrifice
1. Jesus' Teaching
2. Paul's Teaching
discuss the origin and history of sacrifice in the ethnic religions, it must be noted that sacrifice has been a chief element in almost every religion (Jainism and Buddhism being the principal exceptions). The bloody sacrifice, where the idea of propitiation
3. The Teaching in Hebrews VII The Human Conditions of Application
1. Universal in Objective Potentiality