An oddly concerted device this! in which the tongue must contradict what the ceremony would recognize. Or, how could it be proper, after the violation of some law, or the neglect of some ordinance, immediately to go and offer a sacrifice? What would be the language of such a practice?" I have done wickedly, but my heart is pure and upright." Is this consistent with the spirit of humility, of modesty, or of common ingenuity? Is this the way of giving glory to God, or of taking shame to ourselves? Whereas, let the sacrifice be a typical expiation, and this is the significancy of the action, "Lord, I confess myself guilty. Punishment and death are my due. Let them fall, I beseech thee, on my victim; that thy justice being glorified, and thy law satisfied, thy mercy may be honourably displayed in my forgiveness."

Besides, Theron, what likeness, what agreement is there, between the profession of integrity and an animal mortally wounded, wallowing in its own blood, and struggling in the agonies of death? Whereas, between these dying pangs and the punishment due to sin, or the sorrows sustained by the crucified Saviour, there is an apparent, a striking, and in various respects an edifying resemblance.

Ther. They declared, perhaps, the sacrificer's readiness and resolution to slay the brute in himself, and to lay down his life in adherence to God.

Asp. I do not remember any assertion of this kind in the Bible, or any hint to countenance such an interpretation. It seems, in some cases, to be incompatible with the very nature of things, and contrary to the express declarations of Scripture. Doves, you know, lambs, and sheep, were offered in sacrifice. But shall we slay the lamb, the dove, the sheep in ourselves? So far from it, that Christ's disciples are either described by these creatures, or commanded to imitate their properties. "Be ye harmless as doves,' Matth. x. 16. "Peter, feed my lambs," John xxi. "My sheep hear my voice," John x. 27. Supposing, however, that this might be a subordinate design, or a valuable improvement of the sacri

15.

ficial acts, yet their primary intention, and ultimate end, were widely different; were much more significant of the divine compassions, and much better adapted to the comfort of mankind. They were an awful indication, that death was the wages of sin; at the same time a cheering declaration, that God was pleased to accept the death of the animal instead of the sinner's; a figurative representation also of that illustrious Person, who was to bear the sin of many, and pour out his soul for transgressors.

Ther. Since sacrifices were of a religious nature, they should not only be instructive and beneficial in their tendency, but have their due effects with regard to God, to sin, and to the person who brought them.

Asp. They had their effects with regard to God, that his justice might be magnified and his anger appeased—to sin, that its demerit might be displayed, yet its guilt be done away-to the person who brought them, that he might obtain pardon, be exempted from punishment, and exercise his faith on the Lord Jesus Christ.

Ther. There are so many sorts of sacrifice appointed in the Jewish rubric, that I am at a loss for a distinct idea, unless some one be singled out and separately considered.

Asp. Among all the sacrifices instituted by Moses, none more circumstantially typified the blessed Jesus, or more appositely expressed the benefits of his oblation, than the paschal lamb, and the sin-offering, on the day of atonement.

An expositor, who cannot be mistaken, has given us this interpretation of the paschal lamb: "Christ our passover is sacrificed for us ;"* declaring hereby, that Christ is a real sacrifice; that he was prefigured, in this capacity, by the paschal lamb; that the cir

"Paul our passover

1 Cor. v. 7. Would any one venture to say, is sacrificed for us?" Yet this, I think, may be, or rather is in effect said, by the account which some persons give of Christ's satisfaction. The very thought of such a blasphemous absurdity is too painful and offensive for the serious Christian to dwell upon.

cumstances which distinguished it, met in him; and the advantages which resulted from it, were procured by him: those, in their truest import-these, in their largest extent. The words of the apostle speak this sense to the plainest, simplest reader. Whereas, to extort any other signification from them, what subtilty of wit, and what refinement, or rather violence of criticism, must be used!

The paschal lamb was without blemish. Such was the Lamb of God; free from all taint of original sin, and from every spot of actual transgression.-A lamb of the first year, in all the sprightliness and floridity of youth. Christ also laid down his life, not when worn with age, or debilitated with sickness; but in the very prime of his days; amidst all the bloom of health, and all the vigour of manhood.-The lamb was to be slain in such a manner, as might occasion the most copious effusion of its blood. And was not this very exactly fulfilled in our suffering Saviour? His blood flowed out in vast abundance, by the amazing sweat in the garden; by the rending lashes of the scourge; by the lacerating points of the thorns; by the dreadful nails which cleft his hands and his feet; by the deadly spear which ripped open his side, and cut its way to his heart.-Though the blood was to be so liberally spilt, a bone of the lamb was not to be broken. And you cannot but recollect, you cannot but admire, the wonderful interposition of Providence, to accomplish this emblematical prediction. When the soldiers had received a command to break the legs of the three crucified persons; when they had actually broke the legs of each malefactor, which hung on the right side of our Lord and on the left; their minds were overruled (by a divine influence, no doubt) to spare the blessed Jesus, and to leave all his bones unhurt, untouched.

The lamb was to be killed before the whole assembly; in the presence, either of the whole congregation of Israel, or else of that particular society which concurred in eating the flesh. And did not the whole

multitude of the Jews conspire against our Redeemer to put him to death? Did they not all cry out, as with one voice, Crucify him! Crucify him! Was he not executed at one of their grand festivals, and in the sight of the whole assembled nation?—The blood was not to be poured heedlessly upon the ground, but received carefully into a basin, and sprinkled, with the utmost punctuality, upon the door-posts. In like manner, the blood of the heavenly Lamb is not to be trampled under foot by a contemptuous disregard. It is the treasure of the church, and the medicine of life; to be received, therefore, by an humble faith, and devoutly applied to our consciences.-The sprinkling of that blood secured every Israelitish family from the destroying angel's sword. So the merits of the slaughtered Saviour screen every believing sinner from the stroke of offended justice, and from the pains of eternal death.-What must have become of the Israelite, who, trusting to the uprightness of his heart, should neglect to make use of this divinely appointed safeguard? He must inevitably have been punished with the death of his first-born. Equally certain, but infinitely more dreadful, will be his condemnation, who, before the omniscient Judge, shall presume to plead his own integrity, or confide in his own repentance, and reject the atonement of the dying Jesus.

Ther. Now, if you please, for the sin offering,t which seems to have been the most eminent sacrifice of them all.

Asp. It was the most comprehensive, because it shadowed forth not only the death of Christ, but his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into

* Both St Peter and St Paul speak of the blood of sprinkling, 1 Pet. i. 2. Heb. xii. 24.; intimating, by this remarkable form of speech, that the death of Christ will be of no advantage to the sinner, unless it be applied to his heart; as the blood of the paschal lamb was no protection to an Israelite, till it had tinged the posts of his door.

+ For the circumstances relating to the sin-offering, the reader will consult Lev. xvi. For those which concern the paschal lamb, he will have recourse to Exod. xii.

heaven. As the various actions of some illustrious personage, which cannot be exhibited by the painter in a single draught, are displayed in several compartments, yet all constitute one and the same grand historical picture; so, these glorious events, incapable of being represented by any single animal, were typified by two kids of the goats, which nevertheless were reputed but as one offering.*

These goats were brought to the door of the tabernacle, and there presented before the Lord. Christ also presented himself before God, when " he went up to Jerusalem, that all things written by the prophets concerning him might be accomplished," Luke xviii. 31. The goat on which the Lord's lot fell, was devoted to death. "Christ also being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God,' Acts ii. 23. " was crucified and slain." The body was burned without the camp, which pointed at the very place, and pictured out the very nature of our Lord's sufferings: "For he suffered without the gate," Heb. xiii. 12.; was there exposed to the rage of men and the wrath of God, under the most ex

5.

* How runs the divine command? "He (the high-priest) shall take of the congregation two kids of the goats for a sin-offering," Lev. xvi, Are not these two kids styled, in the singular number and collective sense, an offering? That we might not mistake, God is pleased to add, "and one ram for a burnt-offering." Here he names one, to prevent a misapprehension of his meaning when he had before said two. To render his meaning still more apparent, and that we may regard this goat as joined in the same offering with the other, the Lord, contrary to his own rule in all other cases, orders the high-priest to lay his hands upon the head of the scape-goat, not upon the head of the goat devoted to death. He divides the necessary circumstances of a sacrifice between them both, to intimate, in the clearest manner, that neither the one nor the other separate, but both taken together, were the one sacrificial oblation, appointed for this distinguished solemnity.

If this be true, I think the passage is a pretty considerable proof, that atonement was made by suffering vicarious punishment; notwithstanding what has been urged against it, from the tenth verse of the chapter. Should we require human authority for the support of this interpretation, one of the greatest human authorities may be seen in the celebrated Witsius: "Uterque hircus pertinebat ad unum sacrificium pro peccato, hostiæ unius loco. Uterque erat pecus piacularis, vicaria Israeli peccatori, ejusque peccatum ferens." De Oecon. lib. iv. cap. 6.