sound of the bells gave notice to the people in the outer court of the high-priest's entrance into the holy place to burn incense; in order that they might then apply themselves to their devotions, as an expression of their concurrence with him in his offering, and of their hope that their prayers, accompanied with the incense offered by him, would ascend as a fragrant odour before God.

66

extravagant; but such wild comments serve no other purpose than to throw an air of romance, of uncertainty, and of ridicule over sacred things. It is sufficient for us to be assured, that these minute prescriptions were adapted to wise and excellent purposes, in the comparatively infant state of the church; and, particularly, that they served the general uses of an emblematical and typical religion, which was intended to impress moral and spiritual truth by sensible and striking representations.4

2. The Ephod was a vest, which was fastened on the shoulders, the hinder part reaching down to the heels, while the fore part descended only a little below the waist. It was The high-priest, who was the chief man in Israel, and of fine twisted linen, splendidly wrought with gold and pur-appeared before God in behalf of the people in their sacred ple: to each of the shoulder-straps of this ephod was affixed services, and who was appointed for sacrifice, for blessing, a precious stone, on which were engraven the names of the and for intercession, was a type of Jesus Christ, that great twelve tribes of Israel. high-priest, who offered himself a sacrifice for sin, who blesses his people, and who evermore liveth to make intercession for them. The term priest is also applied to every true believer, who is enabled to offer up himself a spiritual sacrifice acceptable to God through Christ. (1 Pet. ii. 5. Rev. i. 6.)3 The pontifical dignity, in its first institution, was held for life, provided the high-priests were not guilty of crimes that merited deposition. For we read that Solomon deprived Abiathar of this office for being concerned in treasonable practices with Adonijah, who aspired to the throne of Israel. (1 Kings ii. 27.) At its first institution, also, the high-priesthood was made hereditary in the family of Aaron (Num. iii. 10.), who was the first person invested with this dignity. (Lev. viii. 1. et seq. Heb. v. 4, 5.) From Aaron it descended to Eleazar, his eldest son, from whom it passed in long succession to Eli; from him, on account of the wickedness of his sons, the dignity subsequently devolved to the descendants of Ithamar the second son of Aaron. (1 Sam. ii. 35, 36.) In the reign of Solomon, however, it returned again into the family of Eleazar by Zadok (1 Kings ii. 35.); in which it remained until the Babylonian captivity. During this period the high-priest was elected by the other priests, or else by an assembly partly consisting of priests.

3. The Breastplate of Judgment, or oracle, was a piece of cloth doubled, one span square, and of similar texture and workmanship with the ephod: on it were set twelve precious stones, containing the engraved names of the twelve sons of Jacob, and also the words Urim and Thummim, signifying lights and perfections," and emblematical of divine illumination. Concerning the nature of the Urim and Thummim, learned men are not agreed. All that we know with certainty is, that when the high-priest went to ask counsel of Jehovah, he presented himself arrayed with this breastplate, and received the divine commands. This mode of consultation subsisted under the tabernacle erected by Moses in the wilderness, and until the building of Solomon's temple. As God was the political sovereign of the Hebrews, the highpriest was of course his minister of state: the names of the twelve tribes being worn at his breast, when he went to ask counsel of his sovereign, were a fit pledge and medium of divine direction. At the same time, these names being worn both on his breast and shoulders would forcibly instruct him to cherish the tenderest affection, and to exert his utmost power, for their welfare.1

4. The last peculiarity in the dress of the high-priest was a Crown or Mitre, on the front of which was tied, by a blue riband, a plate of pure gold, on which were engraven

(KODESH LAJCнovaн), or Holiness unto the Lord, emblematical of that holiness which was the scope and end of the law.

With all these vestments the high-priest was necessarily arrayed when he ministered in the tabernacle or temple, but at other times he wore the ordinary dress of the priests; and this, according to some learned persons, was the reason why St. Paul who had been long absent from Jerusalem, knew not that Ananias was the high-priest, when he appeared before him in the sanhedrin.2 (Acts xxiii. 5.) The frequent and violent changes in the pontifical office, which happened in those times, confirms the probability of this conjecture. The supreme pontiff was not allowed to rend his garments, as the other Jews did, on any occasions of domestic calamity (Lev. xxi. 10.); but in the time of Jesus Christ it had become lawful, or at least was tolerated as an expression of horror at hearing what was deemed blasphemy against God. This will explain the conduct of Caiaphas, who is said (Matt. xxvi. 65.) to have rent his garments.3

The Jewish writers have discovered much recondite meaning in the pontifical vestments. According to Josephus and Philo, the high-priest's linen garments represented the body of the earth; the glorious robe which encompassed it, heaven; the bells and promegranates, thunder and lightning. Or, the ephod of various colours is the universe; the breastplate, the earth in its centre; the girdle, the sea; the onyx-stone on each shoulder, the sun and moon; the twelve jewels in the breastplate, the twelve signs of the zodiac; the mitre, heaven; and the golden plate, with the name of God engraven on it, the splendour of Jehovah in heaven. Some Christian divines have allegorized them in a manner equally

1 Tappan's Lectures on Jewish Antiq. pp. 157-160.

2 The dress and ornaments of the high-priest above noticed, together with the mode of consecrating him, as directed by Moses, are described at length in Exod. xxviii. and xxix. 1-37.

Tappan's Lectures, p. 164.

The first high-priest, after the return from the captivity, was Joshua the son of Josedek, of the family of Eleazar; whence the succession went into a private Levitical family. The office was then filled by some of the princes of the Maccabæan family. According to the law, it was or ought to have been held for life; but this was very ill obeyed under the Roman government, especially during the time of our Saviour, and in the latter years of the Jewish polity, when election and the right of succession were totally disregarded. The dignity, sanctity, and authority of the high-priest were then almost annihilated; and this office was not unfrequently sold to the highest bidder, to persons who had neither age, learning, nor rank to recommend them; nay, even to individuals who were not of the sacerdotal race; and sometimes the office was made annual. This circumstance will account for the variations in the lists of the succession to the highpriesthood contained in the Scriptures, in Josephus, and in the Talmudical writers; and will also explain the circumstance of several high-priests being in existence at the same time, or, rather, of there being several pontifical men who, having once held the office for a short time, seem to have retained the original dignity attached to the name.

4 Besides the authorities already cited in the course of this article, the

reader who is desirous of investigating the nature and functions of the Jewish priesthood is referred to Reland's Antiquitates veterum Hebræoi. cc. 10, 11. pp. 105-128.; and to Schacht's Animadversiones ad Ikenii rum, part ii. cc. 1-6. pp. 141-238.; Ikenius's Antiquitates Hebraicæ, part Antiquitates, pp. 471-544. Dr. Jennings's Jewish Antiquities, book i. c. 5. pp. 95-174. Michaelis's Commentaries on the Law of Moses, vol. i. pp. 377-380. 397. 681.; Carpzovii Antiquitates Hebr. Gentis, pp. 64-110. 251-262.; Dr. Lightfoot's Works, vol. i. pp. 401. 915-918. and vol. ii. pp.

The typical nature of the Jewish priesthood, especially of the highpriest, is discussed by the Rev. W. Jones, in his Lectures on the Figurative Language of Scripture, and on the Epistle to the Hebrews. (Works, vol. iii. pp. 58-62. 223–227.) Josephus de Bell. Jud. lib. iv. c. 3. §§ 7, 8.

That this was the case with Annas and Caiaphas, is fully proved by Dr. Lardner, Credibility, book ii. c. 4. §1. (Works, vol. i. pp. 33-386.) The various successions of the high-priests are given at length by Reland, Antiq. Hebr. part ii. c. 2. pp. 160-168. Utrecht, 12mo. 1717; and by Calmet, Dissertations, tom. i. pp. 487-490., and Dict. voce Priest, from whom we have copied the Table in the following pages.

Antiq. Jud. lib. viii. c. 2. §2. c. 4. §3.

The following TABLE exhibits a CHRONOLOGICAL SERIES OF THE HIGHPRIESTS OF THE HEEREWS, from the Commencement to the Subversion of their State and Government.

3. Succession, ta-t
ken from Jose-
phus, Ant. Jud.
lib. x. c. 8. lib.
XX. c. 10.

3. Phinehas, A. M. 2571, 3. Phinehas. 3. Phinehas. 3. Phinehas. died 200.

Amariah, perhaps 17. Ahitub II. 17. Phideus. 17. Jotham, under years, from 4016 to 4027, of the vul

24. Eliakim, or Joakim, 24. Joshua. under Manasseh, and

at the time of the siege
of Bethulia, in 3349.
He continued to live
under Josiah to 3380,
and longer. He is also
called Hilkiah. (Ba-
ruch i. 7.)

25. Azariah perhaps Ne-
riah, the father of Sera-
iah and of Baruch.
26. Seraiah, the last high-
priest before the cap-
tivity; put to death in
3414.

27. Jozadak, during the
captivity of Babylon,
from 3414 to 3469.
28. Joshua, or Jesus, the
son of Jozadak: he re-
turned from Babylon
in 3108.

28. Jesus, or
Joshua.

V. The NAZARITES (as the Hebrew word Nazir implies) | 19.) that, because the Rechabites had obeyed the precepts of were persons separated from the use of certain things, and Jonadab their father, therefore Jonadab should not want a man sequestered or consecrated to Jehovah. They are commonly to stand before him for ever.2 The Rechabites flourished as a regarded as sacred persons; a notice of their institute will community about one hundred and eighty years, and were supbe found infra, in chapter v. sect. i. § iii. 2. posed to have been dispersed after the captivity; but modern travellers have discovered their descendants in a tribe of Bedouin Arabs, who dwell alone in the vicinity of Mecca, and are called Beni Khaibr, or the sons of Khaibr (that is, of Heber). They continue to obey the injunctions of their ancestor Rechab. "To this moment they drink no wine, and have neither vineyard, nor field, nor seed; but dwell like Arabs in tents, and are wandering nomades. They believe and observe the law of Moses by tradition, for they are not in possession of the written law."

VI. The RECHABITES are by many writers considered as a class of holy persons, who, like the Nazarites, separated themselves from the rest of the Jews, in order that they might lead a more pious life. But this is evidently a mistake; for they were not Israelites or Jews, but Kenites or Midianites, who used to live in tents, and traversed the country in quest of pasture for their cattle, as the Nabathaan Arabs anciently did, and as the modern Arabians, and Crim-Tatars (or Tartars) still do. Their manner of living was not the result of a religious institute, but a mere civil ordinance, VII. The PROPHETS were eminently distinguished among grounded upon a national custom. They derived their name the persons accounted holy by the Jews: they were raised from Jonadab the son of Rechab, a man of eminent zeal for up by God in an extraordinary manner for the performance the pure worship of God against idolatry, who assisted king of the most sacred functions. Originally they were called Jehu in destroying the house of Ahab and the worshippers Seers: they discovered things yet future, declared the will of of Baal. (2 Kings x. 15, 16. 23.) It was he who gave the God, and announced their divine messages, both to kings and rule of life to his children and their posterity, which is people, with a confidence and freedom that could only be recorded by the prophet Jeremiah (xxxvi. 5—7.); and which produced by the conviction that they were indeed authoconsisted of these three articles: 1. That they should drink rized messengers of Jehovah. The gift of prophecy was not no rine; 2. That they should neither possess nor occupy always annexed to the priesthood: there were prophets of any houses, fields, or vineyards; and, 3. That they should all the tribes, and sometimes even among the Gentiles. The dwell in tents. In these regulations he appears to have had office of a prophet was not confined to the prediction of future no religious, but merely a prudential view, as is intimated events; it was their province to instruct the people, and they in the reason assigned for them, viz. that they might live interpreted the law of God: hence the words prophet and many days in the land where they were strangers. And prophecy are, in many passages of the Scriptures, synony such, in fact, would be the natural consequence of their tem- mous with interpreter or teacher, and interpretation or teachperate and quiet mode of living. On the first invasion of ing. It is unanimously agreed both by Jews and Christians Nebuchadnezzar, with intent to besiege Jerusalem, these that Malachi was the last of the prophets under the Old Rechabites, apprehending themselves in more danger in the Testament dispensation: and it is a remarkable fact, that so open country, came to Jerusalem for safety; by these people long as there were prophets among the Jews, they were not God intended to convince the Jews of their disobedience to divided by sects or heresies, although they often fell into him; and, therefore, he ordered his prophet Jeremiah to bring idolatry. This circumstance may thus be accounted for:-As them to an apartment of the temple, and there offer them the prophets received their communications of the divine wine to drink, which when they refused, on account of its will immediately from God himself, there was no alternative being contrary to their institute, which they never had vio- for the Jews: either the people must obey the prophets, and lated, the prophet, after due commendation of their obedience, receive their interpretations of the law, or no longer acknowaddressed the Jews, and reproached them, who were God's ledge that God who inspired them. When, however, the peculiar people, for being less observant of his laws than law of God came to be explained by weak and fallible men, these poor Rechabites had been of the injunctions of their who seldom agreed in their opinions, sects and parties were ancestor. (Jer. xxxv.) Wherefore Jehovah declares (ver. 18, ❘ the unavoidable result of such conflicting sentiments.

CHAPTER III.

SACRED THING S.

ON THE SACRIFICES AND OTHER OFFERINGS OF THE JEWS.5

General Classification of Sacrifices and Offerings ;—I. BLOODY OFFERINGS, and the divine Origin of Sacrifices ;—1. Different Kinds of Victims ;-2. Selection of Victims ;-3. Manner of presenting them ;—4. Immolation of the Sacrifice ;—5. The Place and Time appointed for sacrificing;—6. Different Kinds of Fire-sacrifices ;—i. Burnt-offerings ;—ii. Peace-offerings;-iii. Sin-offerings;-iv. Trespass-offerings;—II. National, regular, weekly, monthly, and annual Sacrifices.—III. UNBLOODY OFFERINGS. IV. DRINK-OFFERINGS.-V. Other Oblations made by the Jews:-1. ORDINARY OBLATIONS;-(1.) The Shew-bread.-(2.) Incense.—2. VOLUNTARY OBLATIONS.-Corban.-3. PRESCRIBED OBLATIONS;—(1.) First-fruits; −(2.) Tithes.—VI. Fitness and Utility of the Jewish Sacrifices.

A SACRIFICE is an offering made to God upon his altar by the hand of a lawful minister. Sacrifice differs from oblation in this respect, viz. in a sacrifice there must be a real change 1 See Mrs. Holderness's Notes relating to the Manners and Customs of

the Crim-Tatars. London, 1821. 12mo.

Lamy's Apparatus Biblicus, vol. i. p. 223. Michaelis's Commentaries on the Law of Moses, vol. i. pp. 227, 228 Mede's Works, p. 127. Calmet, Commentaire Littérale, tome vi. p. xvii. The reader will find an instructive discourse on the history of the Rechabites, in Dr. Townson's Works, vol. ii. pp. 215-225.

of the East, pp. 95, 96.

Iv. sect. i. infra.

Wolff's Missionary Journal and Memoir, p. 257.; Carne's Recollections For a more particular account of the sacred prophets, see part i. chap. General authorities from which this chapter is compiled:-Schulzii Archæol. Heb. pp. 250-280. Lamy, Apparatus Biblicus, vol. i. pp. 187203. Relandi Antiq. Sacr. Hebræorum, part iii. cap. 1-5. pp. 290-368. Ikenii Antiq. Heb. part i. cap. 13, 14. pp. 152-191. Beausobre and L'En fant's Introd. to the New Test. (Bishop Watson's Tracts, vol. iii. pp. 196 199.) Jennings's Jewish Antiquities, book i. chap. v. Michaelis's Commentaries, vol. iii. pp. 94-97. 109-115. 246-254. Dr. Hales's Analysis, vol. ii. book ii. pp. 270-272. Jahn, Archaol. Biblica, $$ 373-390. Dr. Owen on the Epistle to the Hebrews, vol. i. Exercit. xxiv. pp. 306-318. Dr. Lightfoot's Works, vol. i. pp. 926-941. folio edition, $$ 373-385. Ackermann,

or destruction of the thing offered: whereas, an oblation is only a simple offering or gift.

The sacrifices and oblations of the Jews demand particular "Such a notice in this sketch of their ecclesiastical state. ritual as they were enjoined to observe, the multiplicity of victims they were appointed statedly to offer, together with the splendour of that external worship in which they were daily engaged,-all tended to replenish and adorn their language with numerous allusions, and striking metaphors derived from the pomp of their religion. Hence it is that the writings of the Jews, more than of any other people, abound with phrases and terms borrowed from the temple worship and service. The psalms and prophetical writings may in particular be adduced in illustration of this remark. Purge me with hyssop, says David, and I shall be clean. Thou shalt be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness. (Psal. Archæol. Biblica, §§ 360-372. Tappan's Jewish Antiq. pp. 106–118. Brunings, Antiq. Hebr. pp. 172–192. Carpzovii Antiq. Hebr. Gentis pp. 699-725. • Calmet's Dictionary, voce Sacrifice.

1. In all bloody sacrifices it was essential that the animals slaughtered should be clean; but it does not appear that all clean animals were to be offered indiscriminately. Fishes were not brought to the altar; and hence the Israelites are nowhere prohibited from eating their blood, but only that of birds and quadrupeds. (Lev. vii. 26.). It would seem that all clean birds might be offered (Lev. xiv. 4-7.), though the white bulls for their sacrifices, will materially explain the custom above The following account of the manner in which the Egyptians provided dove was the most common offering of this class. Of quad- alluded to "They sacrifice white bulls to Apis, and for that reason make rupeds, oxen, sheep, and goats were the only kinds which the following trial. If they find one black hair upon him, they consider were destined for the altar. No wild beasts were admissi-him as unclean. In order that they may know this with certainty, the priest appointed for this purpose views every part of the animal both ble: and hence comes the expression in the law of Moses standing and lying on the ground: after this, he draws out his tongue, to (Deut. xii. 15, 22. xv. 22.), It shall be eaten like the roe or the see if he be clean by certain signs; and in the last place he inspects the hart; by which he means to intimate that, in killing a beast, If, after this search, the animal is found unblemished, he signifies it by hairs of his tail, that he may be sure they are, as by nature they should be. all religious intention and all idea of sacrifice was to be tying a label to his horns; then, having applied wax, he seals it with his avoided.1 ring, and they lead him away, for it is death to sacrifice one of these ani. mals, unless he has been marked with such a seal." Herodotus, lib. ii. c. 39. vol. i. p. 113. edit. Oxon.

2. In the selection of the victims, the utmost care was taken to choose such only as were free from every blemish. Unless it were pure and immaculate, it was to be rejected, as a sacrifice unacceptable to Jehovah. (Lev. xxii. 22.) In a turtle doves, and young pigeons, which were allowed to be offered in cerbeautiful allusion to this circumstance, St. Paul beseeches Christians, by the mercies of God, to present their bodies a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable, which is their reasonable service. (Rom. xii. 1.) Hence also Jesus Christ is styled a

118

[PART III.

God and man; they were either eucharistical, that is, offered offered with prayers for the impetration of mercies. These as thanksgivings for blessings received, or votive, that is, offerings consisted either of animals, or of bread or dough; if the former, part of them was burnt upon the altar, espe cially all the fat, as an offering to the Lord; and the remainder was to be eaten by the priest and the party offering. To this sacrifice of praise or thanksgiving St. Paul alludes in Heb. xiii. 15, 16. In this kind of sacrifices the victims might be either male or female, provided they were without blemish. The parts of both, which were appropriated to the priests and Levites, were called heave or wave offerings; because they were heaved or lifted up towards heaven, and wared to and fro, before they were eaten, in acknowledgment of the goodness and kindness of God, and also in token of their being consecrated to him. (Lev. iii. 1-6. Exod. xxix. 26, 27. Num. xviii. 24-28.)

SACRED THINGS. Around the altar there was a kind of trench into which the blood fell; whence it was conveyed by subterraneous chan-will-offerings, in token of peace and reconciliation between ii. The PEACE-OFFERINGS (Lev. iii. 1.) were also freenels into the brook Cedron. This altar, being very high, is considered by Lamy as a type of the cross to which our Saviour was fixed, and which he washed with his precious blood. The victim being thus immolated, the skin was stripped from the neck; its breast was opened; its bowels were taken out, and the back bone was cleft. It was then divided into quarters; so that, both externally and internally, it was fully exposed to view. To this custom of laying open the victim, St. Paul has a very beautiful and emphatic allusion in one of the most animated descriptions ever written, of the mighty effects produced by the preached Gospel. (Heb. iv. 12, 13.) The word of God is quick and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight; for all things are naked and OPENED to the eyes of him to whom we must give an account. Previously to laying the sacrifice on the altar, it was salted for the fire (Lev. ii. 13. Ezek. xliii. 24. Mark ix. 46.); the law prohibiting any thing to be offered there which was not salted: and according to the nature of the sacrifice, either the whole or part of the victim was consumed upon the altar, where the priests kept a fire perpetually burning.'

5. Before the building of the temple, sacrifices were offered at the door of the tabernacle; but after its erection it was not lawful to offer them elsewhere. (Deut. xii. 14.) hibition took from the Jews the liberty of sacrificing in any This proother place. The victims might indeed be slain in any part of the priest's court, but not without its precincts; and there they were also obliged to sacrifice the paschal lamb. All the victims were to be offered by daylight, and the blood was always to be sprinkled on the same day that they were slain; as it became polluted as soon as the sun was set. however, the sprinkling had been made in the daytime, the If, members and entrails of the victim might be consumed during the night. Subsequently to the time of Moses, indeed, altars were multiplied, but they fell under suspicion, although some of them, perhaps, were sacred to the worship of the true God. Nevertheless, on extraordinary occasions, some prophets, whose characters were above all suspicion, did offer sacrifices in other places than that prescribed by the Mosaic laws; as Samuel (1 Sam. xiii. 8-14. xvi. 1—5.), and Elijah. (1 Kings xviii. 21-40.)

MIM), from (SHULAM), to complete or make whole: because, by these offerings that which was deficient was consiThe peace-offerings are in Hebrew termed by (SHELAdered as being now made up; and that which was broken, viz. the covenant of God, by his creature's transgression, was supposed to be made whole: so that, after such an offering, itself as reconciled to God, and that it might lay confident the sincere and conscientious mind was authorized to consider hold on this covenant of peace. To this St. Paul alludes in that fine passage contained in Eph. ii. 14—19.

were, 1. At the consecration of a priest. (Exod. xxix. 1-37.) 2. At the expiration of the Nazarite vow. (Num. vi. 13—21.) The appointed seasons and occasions of the peace-offering 3. At the solemn dedication of the tabernacle and temple; and, 4. At the purification of a leper.

iii. SIN-OFFERINGS, in Hebrew termed on (CHƠTαAH), for sins committed through ignorance, or wilfully against (from the word 7 (CHɑTA) to miss the mark), were offered knowledge; and which God always punished unless they were expiated. These offerings in general consisted of a sin-offering to God, and a burnt-offering, accompanied with restitution of damage (Lev. v. 2—19. vi. 1-7.), conformably to which our Lord requires previous reconciliation with an injured brother, including restitution, before the burntoffering or gift would be acceptable to God. (Matt. v. 23, 24.) St. Paul (Eph. v. 2.) terms Christ's giving himself for us an 6. The sacrifices of the altar were, in general, called by to God for a sweet smelling savour. (Compare Lev. iv. 31.) the Hebrews Korbanim, that is, offerings or oblations to God, In warm climates nothing is more refreshing than fragrant offering (i. e. a peace-offering), and a sacrifice or sin-offering from the Hebrew word karab, to approach or bring nigh. odours: and as, in the highly figurative language of the anThis term consequently denotes something brought nigh, in cient Hebrews, smelling is used to denote the perception of a order to be dedicated, or offered to God, to whom the person moral quality in another, God is said to smell a sweet savour offering thus had access in the way appointed by the law; from sacrifice, to signify that he perceived with pleasure the and, therefore, at the close of the enumeration of all offerings good disposition which the offerer expressed by such an act by fire it is added (Lev. vii. 37, 38.), This is the law which the Lord commanded Moses in Mount Sinai, in the day gave himself for us, an offering and a sweet-smelling sacrifice of worship. When, therefore, the apostle tells us that Christ that he commanded the children of Israel to offer their KORBANIM, that is, offerings or sacrifices of all sorts.2 or bring nigh to God, he teaches us that Christ's sacrifice for us was highly The Jewish fire-sacrifices were of three kinds; viz. acceptable to God, not only as a signal instance of obedience i. The BURNT-OFFERINGS, or Holocausts, were free-will-ence in establishing the moral government of God. to his Father's will, but also on account of its happy influofferings wholly devoted to God, according to the primitive patriarchal usage. The man himself was to bring them beThe fore the Lord, and they were offered in the manner described in the preceding page. The victim to be offered was, according to the person's ability, a bullock without blemish, or a male of the sheep or goats, or a turtle-dove or pigeon. (Lev. i. 3. 10. 14.) If, however, he was too poor to bring either of these, he was to offer a mincha or meat-offering, of which an account is given in a subsequent page. The Jews esteemed the burnt-offering the most excellent of all their sacrifices, not only on account of its superior antiquity, but also because it was entirely consecrated to God. In allusion to this, St. Paul exhorts Christians to present their bodies, or their whole selves, a living sacrifice to God. (Rom. xii. 1.) The burnt-offerings are in Hebrew termed by (OLH), which signifies to ascend; because this offering, as being wholly consumed, ascended, as it were, to God in smoke or vapour. It was a very expressive type of the sacrifice of Christ, as nothing less than his complete and full sacrifice could make atonement for the sins of the world.

1 Harwood's Introd. to New Test. vol. ii. p. 220. Carpzov has assigned many devout and some fanciful reasons why salt was used in the Jewish sacrifices. Antiq. Heb, Gent. pp. 719-723.

Dr. Owen on the Epistle to the Hebrews, vol. i. Exercitat. xxiv.
See p. 119. infra.

p. 307.

sacrifices offered for the purification of lepers, as well as of women after child-birth (Lev. xii. Luke ii. 24.), were reckoned among the sin-offerings, inasmuch as leprosy and the pains of child-bearing were considered as punishments for eucharistic sacrifices for the recovery of the persons offering them. Maimonides adds, that if the person who offered this some particular sin; though both were accompanied by sacrifice did not repent, and make public confession of his sins, he was not cleansed or purified by it.5

offering had just reason to doubt whether he had violated the law of God or not. (Lev. v. 17, 18.) They do not appear iv. The TRESPASS-OFFERINGS were made, where the party to have differed materially from sin-offerings. In both these kinds of sacrifices, the person who offered them placed his hands on the victim's head (if a sin-offering), and confessed his sin over it, and his trespass over the trespass-offering; saying, "I have sinned, I have done iniquity, I have trespassed, and have done thus and thus, and do return by repentance before thee, and with this I make atonement. The animal was then considered as vicariously bearing the

Macknight on Eph. v. 2.

De Ratione Sacrificii, c. iii. R. 13.

mission, and trespass-offerings for sins of omission. Commentaries, vol Michaelis is of opinion that sin-offerings were made for sins of coniii. p. 96.