Leviticus · Chapter 16

Verse 1. After the death of the two sons of Aaron] It appears from this verse that the natural place of this chapter is immediately after the tenth, where probably it originally stood; but the transposition, if it did take place, must be very ancient, as all the versions acknowledge this chapter in the place in which it now stands.

Verse 1. This chapter would naturally have followed the tenth, where the death of Aaron’s sons is related, if that event had not given occasion for declaring the forementioned laws about those uncleannesses that disqualified an Israelite for approaching the sanctuary.

THE OCCASION OF THE INSTITUTION, 1, 2.

1. After the death of the two sons of Aaron — This judgment of Jehovah is recorded in chap. 10, on which occasion the important safeguards respecting the high priest’s entrance into the most holy place were given. Why this record does not immediately follow chap. x, its natural place, is unknown.

V. 2. At all times-Not whensoever he pleaseth, but only when I shall appoint him, namely, to take down the parts and furniture of it upon every removal, and to minister unto me once in the year. Lest he die-For his irreverence and presumption. In the cloud-In a bright and glorious cloud, over the mercy-seat, as a token when I would have him come.

Verse 2. That he come not at all times into the holy place] By the holy place we are to understand here what is ordinarily called the Holy of Holies, or most holy place; that place within the veil where the ark of the covenant, &c., were laid up; and where God manifested his presence between the cherubim. In ordinary cases the high priest could enter this place only once in the year, that is, on the day of annual atonement; but in extraordinary cases he might enter more frequently, viz., while in the wilderness, in decamping and encamping, he must enter to take down or adjust the things; and on solemn pressing public occasions, he was obliged to enter in order to consult the Lord: but he never entered without the deepest reverence and due preparation.

That it may appear that the grand subject of this chapter, the ordinance of the scape-goat, typified the death and resurrection of Christ, and the atonement thereby made, I beg leave to refer to Hebrews 9:7-12, and Hebrews 9:24-26, which I shall here transcribe, because it is a key to the whole of this chapter. “Into the second [tabernacle] went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people. The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. But Christ being come, a high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; neither by the BLOOD of GOATS and CALVES, but by his OWN BLOOD; he entered into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with the blood of others; (for then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world;) but now once in the end of the world, hath he appeared TO PUT AWAY SIN BY THE SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF.”

Verse 2. That he come not at all times — Not whensoever he pleaseth, but only when I shall appoint. Into the holy place without the veil, the high-priest, or one of the inferior priests, went every morning and evening when they offered incense but into this holy place within the veil, commonly called the holy of holies, or the most holy place, as none but the high-priest was to enter, so neither was he to enter it at all times, as a common place of worship, or to perform divine service there at his pleasure. He was ordinarily to enter it only once a year, and that on the great day of atonement, or expiation for the transgressions of the whole Israelitish nation. Upon extraordinary occasions, he might also enter it oftener, as when he was to consult the oracle of God, or when the tabernacle was to be taken down or set up, according to the journeyings of the people. Lest he die — For his presumption. For I will appear in the cloud — A bright and glorious cloud over the mercy-seat. This sacred apartment he was to look upon as the place of the special residence of the divine glory, and therefore was not to enter there but when appointed, and in such a manner as God directed.

2. Come not at all times — Many of the ancient pagan shrines were inaccessible, and hence they were called adytum and abaton, “not to be approached.” This seclusion of the idol within the penetralia of the temple was requisite in order to preserve the veneration of the people, through the operation of that law of the human mind by which the mysterious is clothed by the imagination with extraordinary qualities. But no such reason is the ground of this prohibition. Jehovah’s majesty needs no imaginary splendours. The old covenant says, “Obey and live, disobey and die;” the new one says, “Believe and be saved, believe not and be damned.” Both covenants are essentially the same, inasmuch as faith is the root of obedience, and unbelief and disobedience are in the New Testament expressed by the same word — apeiqeia. In the cloud — Not the cloud of incense required to soften the insufferable splendours of the shekinah, but the shekinah itself. Hence the Targum of Jonathan, “The glory of my shekinah shall be revealed.” A resplendence beamed forth from between the cherubim; but to make the vision supportable to mortal eyes God hid himself while revealing himself. The cloud is the same as that mentioned in Exodus xl, which appeared over the mercy seat whenever the high priest came before it. The rabbins postulate a cloud continually hanging over the cherubim. Luther, on the contrary, says that “over the propitiatory and cherubim there was nothing located which might be seen, but by faith only was God believed to be seated there.” In the Scriptures the manifested glory of the Son of Man, the Jehovah of the Old Testament, is often associated with a cloud. Daniel 7:13; Revelation 1:7. The mercy seat — We are required by the truth to say that this expression, so poetical and so consolatory to the God-fearing soul, is not a literal translation of the original Hebrew, capporeth, the cover of the ark, in which were enshrined the tables of the law. This cover was underneath the luminous cloud, and hence was the footstool or throne of Jehovah, as the sanctuary in which it was placed is called “the place for thee to dwell in.” Exodus 15:17. The capporeth was a massive gold plate equal to the ark in length and breadth, at either end of which was a solid golden cherub. We find no scripture to sustain Ewald’s assertion that the ark had a cover distinct from this plate, yet it is usually mentioned separately. Exodus 25:17. The word capporeth may be derived from the Piel form of the verb caphar, to cover, in which form it signifies to make atonement; it is very doubtful whether the noun ever signifies an instrument of propitiation (propitiatorium, Vulgate, ilasthrion, the Seventy) in the Pentateuch. Yet it is more probable that in later Hebrew, as in 1 Chronicles 28:11, it acquired the additional meaning of an atonement for sin. This relieves the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews of the imputation made by Furst, that he adopted a gloss in Hebrews 9:5. In Hebrews 4:16 the capporeth is very beautifully styled “the throne of grace,” to which we may come, not with trembling and overwhelming awe, as did the high priest, but “boldly.”

V. 3. With a young bullock-That is, with the blood of it; the body of it was to be offered upon the altar of burnt-offerings. A sin-offering-For his own and family’s sins; for a goat was offered for the sins of the people.

Verse 3. With a young bullock for a sin-offering] The bullock was presented as a sin-offering for himself, his family, the whole priesthood, and probably the Levites. The ram was for a burnt-offering, to signify that he and his associates were wholly consecrated, and to be wholly employed in this work of the ministry. The ceremonies with which these two sacrifices were accompanied are detailed in the following verses.

Verse 3. Thus shall Aaron come — Preparatory to his entering on this solemn service the high-priest was to offer two sacrifices in behalf of himself and his family. These were, 1st, A bullock for a sin-offering, (no other sacrifice being allowed for the sin of a high-priest,) in confession of his own infirmities and transgressions, and those of his family, and to put him in mind that he needed pardon himself, and was but an imperfect intercessor with God, Hebrews 7:27, and 9:7. 2d, A ram for a burnt-offering, in token of his dedicating himself wholly to God, with a promise of new obedience. See note on Leviticus 1:3. Aaron shall come into the holy place with the bullock — That is, with the blood of it; for its body was to be offered upon the altar of burnt-offerings.

Verse 3. A young bullock—and a ram. It appears from Numbers 28:29, 30, that seven lambs and a he-goat were added to the sacrifice, and perhaps a thousand victims from individuals.

AN OUTLINE OF THE WHOLE CEREMONIAL, 3-10.

3. Holy place — This is here used, not for the court of the priests, but for the holy of holies. Bullock — The high office of Aaron requires the greatest of the sin offerings. See chap. 4, concluding notes. (4.) Note the presumption, that this high official had so failed to keep the holy law of God that he annually needed an offering not only for his conscious and wilful sins, but also for his inadvertencies, ignorances, and errors. Hebrews 5:2. See concluding notes to chap. 4.

V. 4. The linen coat-It is observable, the high-priest did not now use his peculiar and glorious robes, but only his linen garments, which were common to him with the ordinary priests. The reason whereof was, because this was not a day of feasting and rejoicing, but of mourning and humiliation, at which times people were to lay aside their ornaments. These are holy-Because appropriated to an holy and religious use.

Verse 4. He shall put on the holy linen coat] He was not to dress in his pontifical garments, but in the simple sacerdotal vestments, or those of the Levites, because it was a day of humiliation; and as he was to offer sacrifices for his own sins, it was necessary that he should appear in habits suited to the occasion. Hence he has neither the robe, the ephod, the breastplate, the mitre, &c.; these constituted his dress of dignity as the high priest of God, ministering for others and the representative of Christ: but now he appears, before God as a sinner, offering an atonement for his transgressions, and his garments are those of humiliation.

Verse 4. He shall put on the holy linen coat — Upon other days, when the high-priest officiated, he was bound to put on all the garments mentioned Exodus 28:4, four of which were called golden garments, because there was a mixture of gold in them; but on this day he put on only the four linen garments here specified, which were common to him with the ordinary priests. The reason whereof was, that this was not a day of feasting and rejoicing, but of mourning and humiliation, at which times people were to lay aside their ornaments. At this solemn season the high-priest was to wear nothing but linen, and that probably not only in token of humiliation, but also because it is a more proper emblem of purity than woollen, as it is more easily cleansed, and washes whiter. These are holy garments — Peculiarly so; to be used only when he was in the exercise of this solemn part of his sacred office. Therefore shall he wash his flesh in water — Besides the washing of his hands and feet, as upon other days, at the beginning of the service, the high-priest was, on this day, to wash his whole body before he put on these holy garments, and entered on the solemn service of the day; which significant rite fitly betokened that peculiar holiness and purity which become all that approach God in his worship, and especially all that minister in holy things.

Ver. 4. The holy linen coat. Herodotus, in Euterpe, says that the Egyptian priests are clothed with a linen robe only, and wear shoes made of papier wood.

4. The holy linen coat — This requirement, that Aaron should divest himself of his pontifical robes when he appears before the Lord as a penitent, teaches us that no worldly distinction, no ecclesiastical preferment, is of any avail to avert the wrath of God. When Aaron represents God to men he may well be clothed with splendour, but when as a sinner he stands before the divine holiness, that splendour pales. The day of atonement stained the glory of all flesh by the revelation of Jehovah’s holiness in contrast with man’s guilt. Breeches — Properly, drawers. See Leviticus 6:10, note. The high priest is required to appear in the apparel of a common priest, with the addition of a linen mitre, a distinctive badge of the pontificate. This change of raiment represents a humiliation as deep as does the wearing of sackcloth upon the common people. Wash his flesh — It became the typical high priest to be “holy, harmless, and undefiled,” that he might fitly prefigure the spotless Son of God. It was customary to remove him from his own house to a chamber in the temple seven days before, lest he should contract any defilement which might entail an uncleanness during those seven days, and he be disqualified for his duty on the great day of atonement. During this time he was exercised in all the various parts of the service, though not entering within the veil. The law relating to his duties was read to him again and again, lest he should make any mistake in his office on that day to his own destruction and the detriment of the people. The elders of the Sanhedrin solemnly adjured him in these words: “We adjure thee, O high priest, our delegate, by Him that caused his name to dwell in this house, that thou alter not any thing of what we have spoken unto thee.”-Delitzsch on the Hebrews, Appendix.

5. Two kids of the goats — This expression in the Hebrew is usually understood to mean” he-goats,” (R.V.,) which were used as sin offerings for princes and for the people on high festival seasons. See Leviticus 23:19, note. For a sin offering — It is worthy of note that both the goats are for a sin offering, though only one of them is to be slain.

6. Shall offer — R.V., “present.” The actual offering does not take place until verse 11. An atonement for himself — “An innocent man,” says Van der Waegen, “must come and make atonement for the guilty; but the guilty may not come and make atonement for the innocent.” Since innocence is not inherent in fallen man by nature or practice, only as one who had himself been atoned could the high priest make atonement for others. “Every reconciling and sanctifying effect of the sacrifices is dependent on the existence of a personally reconciling mediatorship before God; and here the old covenant proclaims its inadequacy to institute a real reconciliation, in the fact that even the high priest himself, through whose intercessions the defect which attaches to the offering is made good, himself in turn has need of reconciliation and purification, as one subject to sin and weakness.” Comp. Hebrews 5:3. — Oehler. Here the Antitype, Jesus, differs from his types. His priesthood was unique in its sinlessness, and his piety unique in its impenitence. When God acknowledges a high priest as well-pleasing in his sight, this is a real declaration that he graciously accepts the whole people. On the contrary, his error is the inculpation of the people. Leviticus 4:3, note. That this required atonement is for involuntary defects and inadvertencies arising from fallen nature, rather than for special cases of transgression, is evident not only from the provision made for the latter in Leviticus 4:3-12, but also from the presumption of sinfulness referred to in verse 3, note. Aaron’s confession of sin was in these words: “O, for Jehovah’s sake, do Thou expiate the misdeeds, the crimes, and the sins wherewith I have done evil, and have sinned before thee, I and my house, as is written in the law of Moses thy servant,” concluding with quoting verse 30. — Delitzsch on the Hebrews, Appendix. And for his house — Hence only a married high priest was permitted to officiate on the day of atonement.

Verse 7. And he shall take the two goats] It is allowed on all hands that this ceremony, taken in all its parts, pointed out the Lord Jesus dying for our sins and rising again for our justification; being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit. Two goats are brought, one to be slain as a sacrifice for sin, the other to have the transgressions of the people confessed over his head, and then to be sent away into the wilderness. The animal by this act was represented as bearing away or carrying off the sins of the people. The two goats made only one sacrifice, yet only one of them was slain. One animal could not point out both the Divine and human nature of Christ, nor show both his death and resurrection, for the goat that was killed could not be made alive. The Divine and human natures in Christ were essential to the grand expiation: yet the human nature alone suffered, for the Divine nature could not suffer; but its presence in the human nature, while agonizing unto death, stamped those agonies, and the consequent death, with infinite merit. The goat therefore that was slain prefigured his human nature and its death; the goat that escaped pointed out his resurrection. The one shows the atonement for sin, as the ground of justification; the other Christ’s victory, and the total removal of sin in the sanctification of the soul. Concerning these ceremonies we shall see farther particulars as we proceed.

According to Maimonides fifteen beasts were offered on this day. “The daily, or morning and evening sacrifice, was offered as usual: besides a bullock, a ram, and seven lambs, all burnt-offerings; and a goat for a sin-offering, which was eaten in the evening. Then a bullock for a sin-offering, and this they burnt; and a ram for a burnt-offering: these both for the high priest. Then the ram for the consecration, (see Leviticus 16:5) which is called the people’s ram. They brought also for the congregation two he-goats; the one for a sin-offering, the other for a scape-goat. Thus all the beasts offered on this great solemn day were FIFTEEN: the two daily sacrifices, one bullock, two rams, and seven lambs: all of these burnt-offerings. Two goats for sin-offerings; one offered without and eaten on the evening, the other offered within and burnt; and one bullock for a sin-offering for the high priest. The service of all these fifteen beasts is performed on this day by the high priest only.” See Maimonides and Ainsworth on the place.

Verse 7. He shall present them before the Lord — The scape-goat was presented at the door of the tabernacle before the Lord, as well as the other goat, to signify that they were both consecrated to him; indeed they both made but one sin-offering, verse 5.

AN OUTLINE OF THE WHOLE CEREMONIAL, 3-10.

3. Holy place — This is here used, not for the court of the priests, but for the holy of holies. Bullock — The high office of Aaron requires the greatest of the sin offerings. See chap. 4, concluding notes. (4.) Note the presumption, that this high official had so failed to keep the holy law of God that he annually needed an offering not only for his conscious and wilful sins, but also for his inadvertencies, ignorances, and errors. Hebrews 5:2. See concluding notes to chap. 4.

V. 8. For the Lord-For the Lord’s use by way of sacrifice. Both this and the other goat typified Christ; this in his death and passion for us; that in his resurrection for our deliverance.

Verse 8. Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats] The Jews inform us that there were two lots made either of wood, stone, or any kind of metal. On one was written לשם LASHSHEM, for the NAME, i.e., hwhy JEHOVAH, which the Jews will neither write nor pronounce: on the other was written לעזאזל LAAZAZEL, for the SCAPE-GOAT: then they put the two lots into a vessel which was called yplq kalpey, the goats standing with their faces towards the west. Then the priest came, and the goats stood before him, one on the right hand and the other on the left; the kalpey was then shaken, and the priest put in both his hands and brought out a lot in each: that which was in his right hand he laid on the goat that was on his right, and that in his left hand he laid on the goat that was on his left; and according to what was written on the lots, the scape-goat and the goat for sacrifice were ascertained. See the Mishna, in Tract. Yoma.

The determining this solemn business by lot, the disposal of which is with the Lord, Proverbs 16:33, shows that God alone was to select and point out the person by whom this great atonement was to be made; hence he says: Behold I lay in Zion a stone, elect (that is, chosen by himself) and precious-of infinite value.

Verse 8. One lot for the Lord — To be sacrificed to him upon his altar. Both this and the other goat typified Christ; this in his death and passion for us, that in his resurrection for our deliverance. The other lot for the scape-goat — The Jewish doctors tell us that this goat, on which the sins of the nation were transferred, was loaded with all marks of reproach, and imprecations, and that the people prayed that all those evils which they thought due to themselves might fall upon it. Thus was Christ made a curse for us, while on him was laid the iniquities of us all.

Ver. 8. The other lot for a scape-goat. lzaz[ Azazel, from Az, a goat, and zail, he went; referring to the goat sent away to the desert. So Buxtorf.— Other critics would turn the words, “The other lot for the goat sent to the mount of Azazail.” In later times the Jews sent the goat to a rock, from which it was precipitated and killed; but we know of no such name for that rock or mount, nor does it appear to have been known to Moses.— Vatablus supposed the mount to be near mount Sinai.—The chief difficulty lies at the 26th verse, where the word occurs twice. Let the goat go for a scape-goat; the literal reading is here preferred by many—Let Azazail go for a scape-goat.

8. Cast lots upon the two goats — The lots were first of boxwood, afterwards of gold, with an inscription on one “for the Name” — Jehovah was too sacred to write — and on the other, “for Azazel.” — Delitzsch on the Hebrews, Appendix. These were put into an urn and shaken, and drawn out with both hands of the high priest; that in the right hand was laid upon the goat standing at his right, and that in the left upon its corresponding goat. Divine Providence was supposed to direct the lots. Proverbs 16:33. The scapegoat — The lzaz[, Azazel, occurs but four times in this chapter, and nowhere else in the Holy Scriptures. It is the puzzle of the Book of Leviticus, over which the most erudite scholars have uttered the despairing groan of “locus vexatissimus.” Bochart, the chief of Hebraists, notwithstanding his profound learning, frankly makes the following humiliating confession: “I have nothing certain to offer in regard to this word;” and Fairbairn admits that “its exact and determinate import is not to be pronounced on with certainty.” The chief theories are, 1.) That it is a place, a rough mountain in the vicinity of Mount Sinai: but no such mountain has ever been found. Besides this, the place is described indefinitely as any “land not inhabited — the wilderness.” 2.) That it is an appellation of God. This is sustained by the Syriac version of Azazel — “the mighty God.” The objection to this view is, that then the lot is a useless formality, since each goat would be allotted to the Deity, either as Jehovah or as the mighty God. 3.) That the word is a personal name for Satan or for one of his satellites. This is favoured by the Book of Enoch, in which Azazel is named as an evil spirit, and by the rabbinical writings, where it occurs as the appellation of one of four demons. The theory that the sins of Israel were confessed over the head of the devil, or over an animal devoted to him, thus making his Satanic majesty co-ordinate with the holy God in the sanctification of his people, so shocks our sense of propriety that we should dismiss it without further comment if the names of modern exegetes as celebrated as Bush, Oehler, Keil, and Ewald, had not given to it the weight of their authority. “The idea that it is a sacrifice to the devil is at utter variance with the whole Levitical system, not to speak of the incongruity of a sin offering to that wicked spirit; this is accordingly generally abandoned. The notion is spun from the interpreter’s own brain, without anything in the text to suggest it, that sin is hereby sent back to Satan as the source from which it has proceeded, or the one to whose realm it properly belongs; or that it is intended as an act of scorn and defiance. This malignant accuser may take these sins and do his worst with them, he can never bring Israel into condemnation for offences which have been expiated and forgiven. 4.) The word ‘Azazel’ is derived from a root meaning ‘to remove;’ and may with greater propriety, as it seems to me, be regarded as an abstract term, meaning, as the British revisers render it in their margin, ‘dismissal,’ or, as the American company prefer, as more descriptive of the function discharged by the goat, ‘removal.’” — Dr. W. Henry Green. “We must be very careful in the application of this term. It is one of the terms liable to abuse. The image has always been accepted as one symbolical of the work of Christ in bearing away the sins of the world. Considered strictly as a figure, it is full of beauty and helpful suggestiveness. It has, nevertheless, been open to the most mischievous perversion.” — Jos. Parker.

9. Lot fell — Hebrew, came up out of the urn. Sin offering — All the sins of Israel, without exception, were atoned for this day by the offering of the two goats on the condition of repentance, even sins not committed inadvertently, and therefore excluded from atonement by sacrifice on other days of the year. See Leviticus 4:2, note. The man who had sinned “with a high hand” — that is, defiantly, with open contempt of Jehovah and his law — was either suddenly cut off (Numbers 16:30) before the day of atonement or hardened himself beyond repentance. See chap. iv, including note 3.

Verse 10. To be the scape-goat] lzaz[ azazel, from z[ az, a goat, and lza azal, to dismiss; the dismissed or sent away goat, to distinguish it from the goat that was to be offered in sacrifice. Most ancient nations had vicarious sacrifices, to which they transferred by certain rites and ceremonies the guilt of the community at large, in the same manner in which the scapegoat was used by the Jews. The white bull that was sacrificed by the Egyptians to their god Apis was of this kind; they cut off the head of the victim which they had sacrificed, and after having loaded it with execrations, “that if there be any evil hanging over them or the land of Egypt, it may be poured out upon that head,” they either sold it to the Greeks or threw it into the Nile.-See HEROD. Euterp., p. 104, edit. Gale. Petronius Arbiter says that it was a custom among the ancient inhabitants of Marseilles, whenever they were afflicted by any pestilence, to take one of the poorer citizens who offered himself for the purpose, and having fed him a whole year with the purest and best food, they adorned him with vervain, and clothed him with sacred vestments: they then led him round their city, loading him with execrations; and having prayed that all the evils to which the city was exposed might fall upon him, they then precipitated him from the top of a rock.-Satiricon, in fine.

Suidas, under the word periyhma, observes that it was a custom to devote a man annually to death for the safety of the people, with these words, periyhma hmwn genou, Be thou our purifier; and, having said so, to throw him into the sea as a sacrifice to Neptune. It was probably to this custom that Virgil alludes when speaking of the pilot Palinurus, who fell into the sea and was drowned, he says:—

Unum pro multis dabiter caput.

Æn., lib. v., ver. 815.

“One life is given for the preservation of many.”

But the nearest resemblance to the scapegoat of the Hebrews is found in the Ashummeed Jugg of the Hindoos, where a horse is used instead of a goat, the description of which I shall here introduce from Mr. Halhed’s Code of Gentoo Laws; Introduction, p. xix.

“That the curious,” says he, “may form some idea of this Gentoo sacrifice when reduced to a symbol, as well as from the subsequent plain account given of it in a chapter of the Code, sec. ix., p. 127, an explanation of it is here inserted from Darul Sheküh’s famous Persian translation of some commentaries upon the four Beids, or original Scriptures of Hindostan. The work itself is extremely scarce, and it was by mere accident that this little specimen was procured:-

“The Ashummeed Jugg does not merely consist in the performance of that ceremony which is open to the inspection of the world, namely, in bringing a horse and sacrificing him; but Ashummeed is to be taken in a mystic signification, as implying that the sacrificer must look upon himself to be typified in that horse, such as he shall be described; because the religious duty of the Ashummeed Jugg comprehends all those other religious duties to the performance of which the wise and holy direct all their actions, and by which all the sincere professors of every different faith aim at perfection. The mystic signification thereof is as follows: The head of that unblemished horse is the symbol of the morning; his eyes are the sun; his breath, the wind; his wide-opening mouth is the bish-waner, or that innate warmth which invigorates all the world; his body typifies one entire year; his back, paradise; his belly, the plains; his hoof, this earth; his sides, the four quarters of the heavens; the bones thereof, the intermediate spaces between the four quarters; the rest of his limbs represent all distinct matter; the places where those limbs meet, or his joints, imply the months, and halves of the months, which are called peche, (or fortnights;) his feet signify night and day; and night and day are of four kinds: 1. The night and day of Brihma; 2. The night and day of angels; 3. The night and day of the world of the spirits of deceased ancestors;

4. The night and day of mortals. These four kinds are typified in his four feet. The rest of his bones are the constellations of the fixed stars, which are the twenty-eight stages of the moon’s course, called the lunar year; his flesh is the clouds; his food, the sand; his tendons, the rivers; his spleen and liver, the mountains; the hair of his body, the vegetables; and his long hair, the trees; the forepart of his body typifies the first half of the day, and the hinder part, the latter half; his yawning is the flash of the lightning, and his turning himself is the thunder of the cloud; his urine represents the rain, and his mental reflection is his only speech. The golden vessels which are prepared before the horse is let loose are the light of the day, and the place where those vessels are kept is a type of the ocean of the east; the silver vessels which are prepared after the horse is let loose are the light of the night, and the place where those vessels are kept is a type of the ocean of the west. These two sorts of vessels are always before and after the horse. The Arabian horse, which on account of his swiftness is called Hy, is the performer of the journeys of angels; the Tajee, which is of the race of Persian horses, is the performer of the journeys of the Kundherps, (or good spirits;) the Wazba, which is of the race of the deformed Tazee horses, is the performer of the journeys of the Jins, (or demons;) and the Ashov, which is of the race of Turkish horses, is the performer of the journeys of mankind: this one horse which performs these several services on account of his four different sorts of riders, obtains the four different appellations. The place where this horse remains is the great ocean, which signifies the great spirit of Perm-Atma, or the universal soul, which proceeds also from that Perm-Atma, and is comprehended in the same Perm-Atma. The intent of this sacrifice is, that a man should consider himself to be in the place of that horse, and look upon all these articles as typified in himself; and conceiving the Atma (or Divine soul) to be an ocean, should let all thought of self be absorbed in that Atma.”

This sacrifice is explained, in sec. ix., p. 127, of the Code of Hindoo Laws, thus:—

“An Ashummeed Jugg is when a person, having commenced a Jugg, (i.e., religious ceremony,) writes various articles upon a scroll of paper on a horse’s neck, and dismisses the horse, sending along with the horse a stout and valiant person, equipped with the best necessaries and accoutrements to accompany the horse day and night whithersoever he shall choose to go; and if any creature, either man, genius, or dragon, should seize the horse, that man opposes such attempt, and having gained the victory upon a battle, again gives the horse his freedom. If any one in this world, or in heaven, or beneath the earth, would seize this horse, and the horse of himself comes to the house of the celebrator of the Jugg, upon killing that horse he must throw the flesh of him upon the fire of the Juk, and utter the prayers of his deity; such a Jugg is called a Jugg Ashummeed, and the merit of it as a religious work is infinite.” This is a most curious circumstance; and the coincidence between the religious rites of two people who probably never had any intercourse with each other, is very remarkable. I would not however say that the Hindoo ceremony could not have been borrowed from the Jews; (though it is very unlikely;) no more than I should say, as some have done, that the Jewish rite was borrowed from the Egyptian sacrifice to Apis mentioned above, which is still more unlikely. See particularly Clarke’s note on “Leviticus 1:4”.

Verse 10. For a scape-goat — This seems to be the most literal and obvious meaning of the original word lzaza, Azazel, evidently derived from z[, ez, or gnez, a goat, and lza, azel, to go away. In this sense the Seventy understand it, rendering the word apopompaiov, sent away; Aquila also, who translates it apolelumenon, dismissed; and Symmachus, who renders it apercomenon, going away. Nor does there appear to be any solid reason for thinking it was the name of a mountain, to which the goat was sent, much less that the angel of death, or the devil, was intended by the word, as some have said; for surely in that case it could be no type of Christ’s resurrection, as it is generally supposed to have been.

10. To make atonement with him — R.V. “for him.” In Leviticus 1:4 the same Hebrew words are translated “to make atonement for him.” Bahr says, that the means of atonement is never marked by l[, upon or for, but always by b, with, and that the former regularly marks the object of the atonement. Hengstenberg also concurs with this view, and remarks that by the live goat being said to be atoned for, “he was thereby identified with the first, and the nature of the dead was transferred to the living;” so that “the goats stand here in a relation entirely similar to that of the two birds in the purification of the leper, of which the one let go was first dipped in the blood of the slain.” Leviticus 14:7. Into the wilderness — Wilderness, with the article, as here, signifies either the desert lying next to the speaker, or the well-known Arabian desert, or that about Petra.

V. 11. The bullock-Mentioned in general, Leviticus 16:6. The ceremonies whereof are here particularly described. This was a different bullock or heifer from that Numbers 19:2,5,9,10,17, as appears by comparing the places.

Verse 11. The bullock — Mentioned in general, verse 6; the ceremonies respecting which are here particularly described. This was a very different sacrifice from that of the red heifer spoken of Numbers 19., as evidently appears upon comparing the two places. He shall kill the bullock which is for himself — Here we may clearly see, as the apostle to the Hebrews argues, the utter insufficiency of the Jewish dispensation to “make the comers thereunto perfect,” or to furnish those who were under it with every thing necessary for their complete justification and salvation. It made nothing perfect, because it made men priests that were sinful creatures like others, and had need to offer year after year for their own sins; for “there was a remembrance made again of sins every year.” But in Christ we have a very different high-priest and intercessor, who is, and when on earth was, holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners, and higher than the heavens, who needeth not daily (as the Jewish high-priests) to offer up sacrifices first for his own sins and then for the people’s: for this he did; he offered for the people’s sins, having none of his own to expiate, once when he offered up himself. For “the law made men priests which had infirmity, but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore, and is able to save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.”

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF CERTAIN RITES, 11-28.

11. Bullock for himself — It must be purchased with the money of the high priest. And for his house — The entire priesthood. There is an antitype; “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy-priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” 1 Peter 2:5.

V. 12. Within the veil-That is, into the holy of holies, Leviticus 16:2.

12. The altar before the Lord — The great or brazen altar. Sweet incense — Aromatic spices. Since the cloud of sweet incense symbolizes ascending prayer perfumed by the merits of the great Mediator, the Hebrew was taught that after his representative had with all pains purified himself, he must come into the holy presence, not on the ground of right, but as a suppliant imploring mercy. Beaten small — It was pulverized, that, when thrown into the censer, it might instantly produce a cloud of smoke, to soften the intense brightness of the shekinah between the cherubim. Within the vail — The holy of holies.

V. 13. Upon the fire-Which was in the censer, Leviticus 16:12.

Verse 13. He shall put the incense upon the fire — The high-priest, having begun the solemn service with slaying the bullock, as a sin-offering of deprecation and atonement for himself and the other priests, lighted his incense-vessel, or censer, at the great altar of burnt-offering, and at his entrance into the holy of holies, threw the incense upon the burning coals, and so filled the place with a cloud of smoke, to prevent him from seeing the ark, and being struck with the glory issuing from between the cherubims, where the Shechinah or emblem of the divine presence resided: or, as others say, that he might not offend by too curiously gazing on the symbols of the divine glory. If we may believe the Jews, he entered sideways, as not daring to look directly on the glory of the place, and that, having filled the sanctuary with a cloud of smoke, he went out backward, having his face directed toward the mercy-seat, in reverence for the divine majesty, which was there represented.

13. Before the Lord — This must here signify in the most holy place. It was considered a grave mistake, amounting to a sacrilege, in a certain Sadducean high priest to dare to kindle the incense without the vail and to carry it smoking within. Since the holy of holies was left in utter darkness, the venture of the high priest into the “thick darkness” where God dwelt strikingly illustrates the faith which is required to approach the mercy seat, where the “light inaccessible” veils itself in the cloud. That he die not — Death through neglect of these precautions may have been natural, and not judicial. See Numbers 4:18, note. “Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.” Exodus 33:20. “Common priests burned incense every day at the altar without the vail. Only once a year, and only after the most careful preparation, goes the high priest into the holiest. If he fail in his preparation he is liable to die. To ask a confirmatory sign of only Gabriel’s message in the holy place, outside the holiest, is to get dumbness for a sign. The high priest went into the holiest with a cord attached, that his body might be drawn out if he were slain.” — Bishop H.W. Warren. The command that the priest envelop himself in a cloud of incense when he raises the curtain expresses the fact that full and cloudless communion with God was not realized under the Old Testament sacrifices; that not until Jesus “by his own blood entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us,” were we able with “boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus;” nor until then could believers enjoy the crowning blessing in the gift of God, the “communion of the Holy Ghost.” John 14:16; 2 Corinthians 13:14.

V. 14. Upon the mercy-seat-To teach us, that God is merciful to sinners only through and for the blood of Christ. With his face east-ward, or upon the eastern part, towards the people, who were in the court which lay east-ward from the holy of holies, which was the most western part of the tabernacle. This signified that the high-priest in this act represented the people, and that God accepted it on their behalf. Before the mercy-seat-On the ground.

Verse 14. He shall take of the blood — He went out of the holy place, and then entered it a second time. We must observe, that as the burning of the incense preceded the sprinkling of the blood, it was hereby signified that he was to be prepared for entering into the most holy place by prayer, and was to enter it in a spirit of prayer, which was figured by incense, and which the offering of incense accompanied, Revelation 8:3, 4. A lively emblem this of the intercession of our great High-Priest, and the efficacy of his merits. He shall sprinkle it upon the mercy-seat — To teach us, that God is merciful to sinners only through and for the blood of Christ. With his face eastward, or upon the eastern part, toward the people, who were in the court which lay eastward from the holy of holies, which was the most western part of the tabernacle. This signified that the high-priest in this act represented the people, and that God accepted it on their behalf; before the mercy-seat — On the ground.

Ver. 14. With his finger. Seven times he sprinkled upon the covering or mercy-seat, and seven times upon the pavement before the mercy-seat. It is remarkable that our Saviour bled seven times for us. His head was crowned with thorns, his back was scourged, his hands and feet were nailed to the cross, and his side pierced for our redemption. It is equally remarkable that the holy scriptures give us a sevenfold view of the atonement for all mankind, even as these victims bled for the whole nation of the Jews.

(1) Christ is the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.

(2) He is our vicarious sacrifice, having suffered the just for the unjust.

(3) He is the propitiation, or mercy-seat sprinkled with blood, for the sins of the whole world.

(4) We are redeemed with his most precious blood, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot.

(5) He is our peace, having made peace by the blood of the cross.

(6) He is the fountain in which the house of David, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the gentile hosts might wash their garments, and make them white as snow.

(7) In a word, he shed the blood of the covenant, which makes all its blessings forever our own. See Hebrews 9.

14. Upon the mercy seat — Eastward. Luther’s version is very literal, “Gegen den Gnadenstuhl sprengen vorn an,” Sprinkle against the mercy seat in front. Our English version is opposed to every Jewish authority. Ewald, however, supports it, while the Vulgate omits these words. Outram and Murphy insist that “the blood did not come upon the mercy seat, but fell upon the ground.” The “Seventy” follows the ambiguity of the Hebrew, which is, “upon the face of the mercy seat eastward.” This may direct that the eastern or front side of the ark and the front edge of its cover, the mercy-seat, be stained with blood, or that the blood drops be sprinkled on the east side of the ark, between it and the vail. If the latter be the meaning the last clause of the verse is a repetition for the purpose of emphasizing the seven times to denote the perfection of the expiation. “The bearing of the blood of expiation into the most holy place, where no Israelite ever entered save the high priest, taught that the true expiation could only be effected by one who should pass into the presence of God, and leave the door wide open for all to enter.” — Dr. A. McLaren. “The anti-typal correlative of the presentation of the blood before the mercy seat was our Lord’s appearance before God the Father, bearing in his glorified body (identical with that which suffered) his own precious blood, now glorified, yet still identical with that which had been shed. That high-priestly self-presentation of the Redeemer is the eternal conclusion and ratifying seal of the work of redemption.” — Delitzsch on the Epistle to the Hebrews. See Leviticus 6:27, note, on the blood of Christ in heaven.

V. 15. Then shall he kill the goat-He went out of the holy of holies, and killed it, and then returned thither again with its blood. And whereas the high-priest is said to be allowed to enter into that place but once in a year, that is to be understood, but one day in a year, though there was occasion of going in and coming out more than once upon that day.

Verse 15. Then shall he kill the goat — He went out of the holy of holies and killed it, and then returned thither again with its blood. And whereas the high-priest is said to be allowed to enter into that place but once in a year, that is to be understood of one day in a year, but there was occasion of going in and coming out more than once upon that day.

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF CERTAIN RITES, 11-28.

11. Bullock for himself — It must be purchased with the money of the high priest. And for his house — The entire priesthood. There is an antitype; “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy-priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” 1 Peter 2:5.

V. 16. Because of the uncleannesses of Israel-For though the people did not enter into that place, yet their sins entered thither, and would hinder the effects of the high-priest’s mediation on their behalf if God was not reconciled to them. In the midst of their uncleanness-In the midst of a sinful people, who defile not themselves only, but also God’s sanctuary. And God hereby shewed them, how much their hearts needed to be purified, when even the tabernacle, only by standing in the midst of them, needed this expiation.

Verse 16. Because of the uncleanness of Israel — For though the people did not enter into that place, yet their sins entered thither, and would have hindered the effects of the high-priest’s mediation on their behalf, if God had not been reconciled to them. In the midst of their uncleanness — In the midst of a sinful people, who defile not themselves only, but also God’s sanctuary. And God hereby showed them how much their hearts needed to be purified, when even the tabernacle, only by standing in the midst of them, needed this expiation.

16. Atonement for the holy place — The holy of holies is viewed as polluted by the impurities of the people and by the imperfect priesthood, and therefore it needs the cleansing blood of sprinkling. Uncleanness — Not depravity or inbred sin, but ceremonial impurity. Transgressions — Actual sins entailing guilt were not pardoned but passed over. Romans 3:25, margin. “The great annual ceremonies of expiation, though powerless to remove spiritual uncleanness, and securing no actual pardon, had this effect, that every man was free to enter the tabernacle and appeal to the divine mercy. They removed whatever external hinderances might have otherwise excluded the sinful nation from the external service of God. They sanctified “to the purifying of the flesh.” — Dall. See Hebrews 9:13. The tabernacle of the congregation — The priests’ apartment without the vail. The manner of its purification may be inferred from Leviticus 4:6, 7. See note. Remaineth — Dwells.

V. 17. In the tabernacle-In the holy place, where the priests and Levites were at other times. This was commanded for the greater reverence to the Divine Majesty then in a more special manner appearing, and that none of them might cast an eye into the holy of holies, as the high-priest went in or came out.

Verse 17. There shall be no man in the tabernacle — In the holy place, where the priests and Levites were at other times. This was commanded for the greater reverence to the divine majesty, then in a more special manner appearing, and that none of them might cast an eye into the holy of holies, as the high-priest went in or came out.

Ver. 17. There shall be no man in the tabernacle. The highpriest might enter there, and that about four times in the year: for there is only one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.

17. There shall be no man in the tabernacle — The entire tabernacle must be vacant. The priests must leave their place and mingle with the Levites on guard around the sacred abode of Jehovah. The penitent people stand in silence and awe while their solitary representative, with trembling, approaches the presence of the holy God. How strikingly this prefigures the fact that there is but one Mediator, the man Jesus Christ. He must ever be solitary in his office. No virgin mother, no saint, no angel can be associated with him in making his atonement and in pleading its merits on high. To thrust an imaginary associate into the office of Intercessor, where Jesus stands alone, is to degrade and vilify him. Hebrews 1:3; 9:7. See concluding note, (6.) For all the congregation — Every penitent Israelite had a share in the benefits of that atonement, as every penitent believer in Jesus Christ receives pardoning grace through his atoning blood. The conditional repentance, though not expressed, is evidently implied; for the notion that the mere mechanical performance of the high priest, irrespective of the state of heart of the sinner, resulted in a reconciliation, is even in the Talmud itself mentioned only to be forthwith rejected. The universality of the atonement is here clearly fore-shadowed.

V. 18. The altar before the Lord-That is, the altar of incense, where the blood of sacrifices was to be put, particularly the blood of the sin-offerings offered upon this day of atonement, and which is most properly said to be before the Lord, that is, before the place where God in a special manner dwelt. His going out relates to the holy of holies, into which he was said to go in, Leviticus 16:17.

Verse 18. The altar before the Lord — That is, the altar of incense, where the blood of sacrifices was to be put, particularly the blood of the sin-offerings offered upon this day of atonement, and which is most properly said to be before the Lord; that is, before the place where God in a special manner dwelt. His going out relates to the holy of holies, into which he was said to go in, verse 17.

18. Blood… horns of the altar — The horns of the incense-altar symbolized the divine favour and mercy. The annual application of the blood renewed the expression of that favour when forfeited by Israel’s sin. Some suppose that the altar of burnt offerings is referred to, and that the purification of the incense altar is implied in that of the holy place, verse

16. See Leviticus 4:7, note.

V. 19. Seven times-To signify its perfect cleansing, (seven being a number of perfection) and our perfect reconciliation by the blood of Christ.

Verse 19. Seven times — To signify its perfect cleansing (seven being a number of perfection) and our perfect reconciliation by the blood of Christ.

19. Cleanse it, and hallow — Ceremonially purify and consecrate, so rendering it fit for divine service.

20. Reconciling the holy place — Purifying by atonement. Thus the R.V. The Hebrew for reconcile is commonly rendered atone.

V. 21. All the iniquities-He mentions iniquities, transgressions, and sins, to note sins of all sorts, and that a free and full confession was to be made, and that the smallest sins needed, and the greatest sins were not excluded from, the benefit of Christ’s death here represented. On the head-Charging all their sins and the punishment due to them upon the goat, which tho’ only a ceremony, yet being done according to God’s appointment and manifestly pointing at Christ upon whom their iniquities and punishments were laid, Isaiah 53:5,6, it was available for this end. And hence the Heathens took their custom of selecting one beast or man, upon whom they laid all their imprecations and curses, and whom they killed as an expiatory sacrifice for their sins, and to prevent their ruin. A fit man-Heb. a man of time, that is, of years and discretion, who may be trusted with this work. Into the wilderness-Which signified the removal of their sins far away both from the people, and out of God’s sight. And here the goat being neglected by all men, and exposed to many hazards from wild beasts, which were numerous there, might farther signify Christ’s being forsaken both by God and by men, even by his own disciples, and the many dangers and sufferings he underwent. The Jews write, that this goat was carried to the mountain called Azazel, whence the goat is so called, Leviticus 16:10, and that there he was cast down headlong.

Verse 21. Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head, &c.] What this imposition of hands meant see in Clarke’s notes on “Exodus 29:10”, and “Leviticus 1:4”.

And confess over him all the iniquities-transgressions-sins] The three terms used here, INIQUITIES, tnw[ avonoth, from hw[ avah, to pervert, distort, or turn aside; TRANSGRESSIONS, פשעים peshaim, from [vp pasha, to transgress, to rebel; and SINS, tacj chattaoth, from acj chata, to miss the mark, are supposed by the Jews to comprise every thing that implies a breach of the Divine law, or an offence against God. See Clarke’s note on “Genesis 12:13”. Maimonides gives us the confession in the following words:-

“O Lord, thy people, the house of Israel, have sinned and done iniquity, and trespassed before thee. O Lord, make atonement now for the iniquities and transgressions and sins that thy people, the house of Israel, have sinned and transgressed against thee; as it is written in the law of Moses thy servant, saying: That in this day he shall make atonement for you, to cleanse you from all your sins before the Lord, and ye shall be clean.”-See the Mishna, vol. ii., p. 329.

When this confession was finished, the goat was sent by a proper hand to the wilderness, and there let loose; and nothing farther was ever heard of it. Did not all this signify that Christ has so carried and borne away our sins, that against them who receive him as the only true atoning sacrifice they should never more be brought to remembrance?

On the head of the scape-goat, a piece of scarlet cloth was tied, and the tradition of the Jews states that if God accepted the sacrifice, the scarlet cloth turned white while the goat was led to the desert; but if God had not accepted this expiation, the redness continued, and the rest of the year was spent in mourning.

From the foundation of the Church of God it was ever believed by his followers, that there were certain infallible tokens by which he discovered to genuine believers his acceptance of them and their services. This was sometimes done by a fire from heaven consuming the sacrifice; sometimes by an oracular communication to the priest or prophet; and at other times, according to the Jewish account, by changing the fillet or cloth on the head of the scape-goat from scarlet to white: but most commonly, and especially under the Gospel dispensation, he gives this assurance to true believers by the testimony of his Spirit in their consciences, that he has forgiven their iniquities, transgressions, and sins, for his sake who has carried their griefs, and borne their sorrows.

Verse 21. All the iniquities — He mentions iniquities, transgressions, and sins, to denote sins of all sorts, and that a free and full confession was to be made, and that the smallest sins needed, and the greatest sins were not excluded from, the benefit of Christ’s death here represented. On the head — Charging all their sins and the punishment due to them upon the goat, which, though only a ceremony, yet being done according to God’s appointment, and manifestly pointing at Christ, upon whom their iniquities and punishments were laid, (Isaiah 53:5, 6,) it was available for this end. And hence the heathens took their custom of selecting one beast or man, upon whom they laid all their imprecations and curses, and whom they killed as an expiatory sacrifice for their sins, and to prevent their ruin. A fit man — Hebrew, a man of time, that is, of years and discretion, who might be trusted with this work. Into the wilderness — Which signified the removal of their sins far away both from the people, and out of God’s sight. And here the goat being neglected by all men, and exposed to many hazards from wild beasts, which were numerous there, might further signify Christ’s being forsaken both by God and by men, even by his own disciples, and the many dangers and sufferings he underwent.

Ver. 21. Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over him the iniquities of Israel. Herodotus, who travelled in Egypt, says in Euterpe, “When the Egyptians had carefully examined a bull to see that he had no defect, then they led him before the altar, and poured wine on the fire. After slaughtering the victim, they cut off his head and burned the body; and having loaded the head with maledictions, they took it to the market to sell it to the Greeks; but if they found no market with foreigners, then they threw the head into the river.” This custom has a striking resemblance to the scape-goat of the Hebrews.

21. Lay… hands upon — See verse 21, and Leviticus 1:4, notes. Among the modern orthodox Jews, instead of the scapegoat, a cock is substituted, which they call an atonement. On the eve of the day of atonement they swing this cock three times around their head, each time saving, in Hebrew, “This is to be sacrificed instead of me.” Then it is slaughtered and eaten. And confess — The Mishna preserves the form of confession: “O Lord, thy people, the house of Israel, have transgressed, they have rebelled, they have sinned before thee. I beseech thee now absolve their transgressions, their rebellion and their sin that they have sinned against thee, as it is written in the law of Moses thy servant,” concluding with verse 30. All the iniquities — This includes all those sins of penitent Israelites for which the ordinary sacrifices did not avail. See verse 9, note. Putting them upon the head of the goat — Here is a positive proof that the laying on of hands upon a victim symbolically transferred the sins of the offerer. The high priest was accustomed to pronounce the following confession of sins, placing both hands on the goat’s head: “O Jehovah, thy people, the house of Israel hath sinned, transgressed, and committed wickedness before thee. O Jehovah, let atonement be made for the sins, transgressions, and wickedness whereby thy people, the house of Israel, hath sinned.” Joseph Roberts, who was for years a Wesleyan missionary in India, tells of a Hindoo custom which seems to recognise the devotedness of a substitute goat, which is set at liberty by one who seeks divine favour. “When a person is sick,” says Roberts, “he vows, on his recovery, to set a goat at liberty in honour of his deity. Having selected a suitable one from his flocks he makes a slit in the ear, or ties a yellow string round its neck, and lets it go whithersoever it pleases. Whoever sees the animal knows it to be a nate kadi, ‘the vowed goat,’ and no person will molest it.… When a person has committed what he considers a great sin he does the same thing; but, in addition to other ceremonies, he sprinkles the animal with water, puts his hands upon it, and prays to be forgiven.” Fit man — “A man that is in readiness.” R.V. He was appointed at a suitable time, hence skilled in his office. Tradition says that he was not an Israelite. Wilderness — See verse 10, note. In the time of Christ the scapegoat was led to a high rock, twelve miles from Jerusalem, down which it was precipitated and killed. This was done by relays of men stationed along the route a sabbath day’s journey, two thousand paces, apart. By this arrangement the goat was hurried rapidly along and dashed down the precipice, and the fact was quickly telegraphed back from man to man to the vast congregation in the holy city, who awaited in breathless silence the sequel which assured them that their sins had been successfully borne away, according to the ritual, when a shout of gladness went up to heaven. — Delitzsch on the Hebrews, Appendix.

Verse 22. Unto a land not inhabited — hrzg xra erets gezra, a land cut off separated, remote from intercourse with men. The Seventy render it abaton, untrod, unpassable, a land through which none travelled. The sending away into this desert land the goat, over which the sins of the people had been humbly and penitently confessed, and to which they were figuratively transferred, was certainly a fine and most expressive emblem that, on condition of the repentance of mankind, and their faith in him who was represented by this goat, and was in due time to take away the sins of the world, God would remember their sins and iniquities no more.

22. Shall bear — See extended note, Leviticus 10:17; Numbers 9:13.

Verse 23. He shall put off the linen garments — Having finished the solemn expiatory and deprecatory offering, he was to put off those garments which were appropriated to this service, and to leave them there. And Maimonides and others say they were never to be used more, either by him or any one else, and that new ones were prepared every year.

23. Put off the linen garments — The distinctive work of atonement having now been accomplished, the garments of humiliation are laid aside and the gorgeous and costly robes of the high priest are put on. Thus Jesus, after saying “It is finished,” laid aside the robes of mortal flesh soon to put on the vesture of a glorified humanity.

V. 24. He shall put on his linen garments-Not his ordinary priestly linen garments, for he was to leave them in the tabernacle, Leviticus 16:23, but the high-priestly garments, called his garments properly, and by way of distinction. And this change of his garments was not without cause. For the common priestly garments were more proper for him in the former part of his ministration, both because he was to appear before the Lord in the most holy place to humble himself and make atonement for his own and for the people’s sins, and therefore his meanest attire was most fit, and because he was to lay his hands upon that goat on which all their sins were put, by which touch both he and his garments would be in some sort defiled, and therefore as he washed himself, so we may presume his linen garments were laid by for the washing, as the clothes of him who carried away the scape-goat were washed, Leviticus 16:26. And the high-priestly garments were most proper for the latter part of his work, which was of another nature.

Verse 24. He shall wash in the holy place — That is, in the court of the tabernacle, where stood the altar of burnt-offering, and the sacred laver. Here he was to wash or sprinkle his whole body, that he might purify himself after he had touched the goat which bare their iniquities, just as the man that carried him into the wilderness was to wash afterward. This ceremony signified that the creature was made so polluted and abominable by being a substitute for sinners, that none could touch it without contracting some pollution. And put on his garments — The garments peculiar to his office, wherein he officiated on other days. And this change of his garments was not without cause. For the common priestly garments were more proper for him in the former part of his ministration, because then he was to appear before the Lord in the most holy place, to humble himself, and make atonement for his own and for the people’s sins, and therefore his meanest attire was most fit. And the high-priestly garments were most proper for the latter part of his work, which was of another nature.

24. And… wash his flesh — His hands and feet were washed from the defilement of the sin offering. In the holy place — Rather, in a holy place, probably near the laver. He then put on his golden pontifical garments and appeared in the sight of the people, symbolizing no longer the suffering Saviour, but the exalted “Mediator of the new covenant.” His duties after sending away the scapegoat were to take the fat out of the goat and bullock, whose blood he had sprinkled in the holy of holies, to cut them into pieces, and to send them without the camp to be burned; to read the sixteenth and part of the twenty-third chapters of Leviticus in the court of the women, blessing the people; then, after his change of raiment, he offered the extra goat (Numbers 29:11) and his own ram for his burnt offering, and the people’s ram; he burned the fat of the sin offering, the bullock and goat, offered the daily evening sacrifice as on other days, trimmed the lamps, laid aside his priestly robes and put on his common clothes, and went home, attended by the people, to celebrate a feast of gladness that he had gone safely through the important ritual of the great day of atonement. “The great lesson is, that the separation of sin from the soul is most difficult. The assayer who would separate the pure metal from the dross must carefully follow most minute directions. Some ores are so refractory that we send them ten thousand miles to be treated. Minute and definite are the directions of Him who would separate sin from the soul. There is but one way. Without the shedding of blood there is no remission.” — Bishop H.W. Warren.

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF CERTAIN RITES, 11-28.

11. Bullock for himself — It must be purchased with the money of the high priest. And for his house — The entire priesthood. There is an antitype; “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy-priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” 1 Peter 2:5.

Verse 26. He that let go the goat-shall wash, &c.] Not only the person who led him away, but the priest who consecrated him, was reputed unclean, because the goat himself was unclean, being considered as bearing the sins of the whole congregation. On this account both the priest and the person who led him to the wilderness were obliged to wash their clothes and bathe themselves, before they could come into the camp.

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF CERTAIN RITES, 11-28.

11. Bullock for himself — It must be purchased with the money of the high priest. And for his house — The entire priesthood. There is an antitype; “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy-priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” 1 Peter 2:5.

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF CERTAIN RITES, 11-28.

11. Bullock for himself — It must be purchased with the money of the high priest. And for his house — The entire priesthood. There is an antitype; “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy-priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” 1 Peter 2:5.

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF CERTAIN RITES, 11-28.

11. Bullock for himself — It must be purchased with the money of the high priest. And for his house — The entire priesthood. There is an antitype; “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy-priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” 1 Peter 2:5.

V. 29. The seventh month-Answering part to our September and part to our October; when they had gathered in all their fruits, and were most at leisure for God’s service: This time God chose for this and other feasts, herein graciously condescending to men’s necessities and conveniences. This feast began in the evening of the ninth day, and continued till the evening of the tenth. Your souls-Yourselves, both your bodies, by abstinence from food and other delights, and your minds by grief for former sins, which though bitter, yet is voluntary in all true penitents, who are therefore here said to afflict themselves, or to be active in the work.

Verse 29. The seventh month, on the tenth day of the month] The commandment of fasting, and sanctifying this tenth day, is again repeated Leviticus 23:27-32; but in the last verse it is called the ninth day at even, because the Jewish day began with the evening. The sacrifices which the day of atonement should have more than other days, are mentioned Numbers 29:7-11; and the jubilee which was celebrated every fiftieth year was solemnly proclaimed by sound of trumpet on this tenth day, Leviticus 25:8,9. A shadow, says Mr. Ainsworth, of that acceptable year of the Lord, the year of freedom, which Christ has proclaimed by the trumpet of his Gospel, Luke 4:18-21; 2 Corinthians 6:2. This seventh month was Tisri, and answers to a part of our September and October. It was the seventh of the sacred and the first month of the civil year.

THE great day of atonement, and the sacrifices, rites, and ceremonies prescribed for it, were commanded to be solemnized by the Jews through the whole of their dispensation, and as long as God should acknowledge them for his people: yet in the present day scarcely a shadow of these things remains; there is no longer a scape-goat, nor a goat for sacrifice, provided by them in any place. They are sinners, and they are without an atonement. How strange it is that they do not see that the essence of their religion is gone, and that consequently God has thrown them entirely out of covenant with himself! The true expiation, the Christ crucified, they refuse to receive, and are consequently without temple, altar, scape-goat, atonement, or any means of salvation! The state of the Gentile world is bad, but that of the Jews is doubly deplorable. Their total excision excepted, wrath is come upon them to the uttermost. What a proof is this of the truth of the predictions in their own law, and of those in the Gospel of Christ! Who, with the Jews and the Bible before his eyes, can doubt the truth of that Bible as a Divine revelation? Had this people been extinct, we might have doubted whether there were ever a people on the earth that acknowledged such a law, or observed such ordinances; but the people, their law, and their prophets are still in being, and all proclaim what God has wrought, and that he has now ceased to work among them, because they have refused to receive and profit by the great atonement; and yet he preserves them alive, and in a state of complete separation from all the people of the earth in all places of their dispersion! How powerfully does the preservation of the Jews as a distinct people bear testimony at once to the truth of their own law which they acknowledge, and the Gospel of Christ which they reject!

2. But while the Jews sit in thick darkness, because of the veil that is on their hearts, though the light of the glory of God is shining all around them, but not into them because of their unbelief; in what state are those who profess to see their unbelief and obstinacy, acknowledge the truth of the New Testament, and yet are living without an atonement applied to their souls for the removal of their iniquities, transgressions, and sins? These are also in the gall of bitterness, and bond of iniquity. An all-sufficient Saviour held out in the New Testament, can do them no more good than a scape-goat and day of atonement described in the law can do the Jews. As well may a man imagine that the word bread can nourish his body, as that the name Christ can save his soul. Both must be received and applied in order that the man may live.

3. The Jews prepared themselves to get benefit from this most solemn ordinance by the deepest humiliations. According to their canons, they were obliged to abstain from all meat and drink-from the bath-from anointing themselves-to go barefoot- and to be in a state of perfect continency. He who is likely to get benefit for his soul through the redemption that is in Christ, must humble himself under the mighty hand of God, confess his iniquity, abstain from every appearance of evil, and believe on him who died for his offences, and rose again for his justification. The soul that seeks not shall not find, even under the Gospel of Christ.

LEVITICUS

Verse 29. The seventh month — Answering part to our September and part to our October; when they had gathered in all their fruits, and were most at leisure for God’s service. This time God chose for this and other feasts, herein graciously condescending to men’s necessities and conveniences. This fast began in the evening of the ninth day, and continued till the evening of the tenth. Your souls — Yourselves, both your bodies, by abstinence from food and other delights; and your minds, by grief for former sins, which, though bitter, yet is voluntary in all true penitents, who are therefore here said to afflict themselves, or to be active in the work.

Ver. 29. On the tenth day of the month ye shall afflict your souls. This is the day, says Maimonides, in which Moses descended from the mount with the second two tables in his hand, and announced to the people the pardon of their sins. On this account it is chosen as a hallowed day of repentance and devotion. This is equally admonitory to the christian church: we should review our errors, and confess our sins to the Lord.

GENERAL RULES RESPECTING THE DAY OF ATONEMENT, 29-34.

29. Statute for ever — See Leviticus 3:17, note. Seventh month — Tisri, the first day of which (about the middle of September) the modern Jews celebrate as the beginning of the civil year. For the importance of the seventh month, the first day of which was the feast of trumpets, see Leviticus 23:24. Tenth day — The writer has spent a portion of this day, Sept. 21, 1874, in a synagogue in Boston, witnessing the penitential worship of the Israelites on the day of atonement. In chap. xxiii, 32, this fast is commanded to be observed on the ninth. The discrepancy disappears when we consider that the tenth day began on the evening of the ninth. Afflict your souls — Give free scope to conviction of sin. “It is worthy of note that the Spirit of truth in the unaffected simplicity of a primeval time dwells on the state of the soul alone, and condescends on no outward manifestations of the inward feeling. The rabbis and doctors interpret affliction of soul by fasting, because such was the formal mode in their day.” — Dr. J.G. Murphy. That repentance, and not fasting, is here commanded is evident, because (1) fasting is neither expressed nor implied in these words; (2) it should precede the benefits of the atonement in the Old Testament, as it does in the New Testament; (3) the required fasting of a whole nation without exception, “from even to even,” tasting neither food nor water, would not be in harmony with God’s goodness. The command to fast is not found in the law, and it is a disputed inference in the Gospel. The penitence of the Hebrew impressively sets forth the truth, that the universal atonement made by Christ is effectual for the pardon of the penitent sinner only. A stranger — For his civil and religious rights, see Leviticus 23:22, note. He is freely admitted into the modern synagogue on the day of atonement.

30. To cleanse you — This cleansing was, 1.) a restoration of the worshipper to membership and communion with the congregation of Israel; and, 2.) the pretermission or Old Testament forgiveness of sins to the penitent believer in the divine promises. For we cannot admit that there was in the Jewish sacraments an operation of grace propria virtute, that is, by themselves alone, irrespective of the spiritual state of the worshipper. “The perfection of the worshippers is the complete restoration of their peace with God; and this only can be attained by the complete removal of the barrier formed by sin, by making them in the fullest sense cleansed. Had this ever really been once effected for the congregation of Israel by the annual sacrifices of the day of atonement, no need would have been felt for a repetition of them. But this was not so.” — Delitzsch on Hebrews 10:2. See Introduction, (7.)

V. 31. A sabbath-Observed as a sabbath-day from all servile works, and diligent attendance upon God’s worship.

Verse 31. A sabbath — Observed as a sabbath day, by cessation from all servile works, and in diligent attendance upon God’s worship.

31. A sabbath of rest — This sabbath (shabbathon) was a decalogue Sabbath only when the day of atonement fell on the seventh day of the week. See Leviticus 23:24, note, with concluding note (2) to the same.

V. 32. He-The high-priest, who was to anoint his successor.

Verse 32. The priest whom he shall anoint, and whom he shall consecrate — This ought to be translated, who shall be anointed, and who shall be consecrated, as the Vulgate hath it. For an active verb without a person is frequently in Scripture to be taken passively; the well observing whereof will tend to the removing of many difficulties. For example; those words of Isaiah, quoted John 12:39, 40, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their hearts, import merely, Their eyes were blinded, and their hearts hardened, as it is expressed Acts 28:27, and Matthew 13:14, 15, compared with Isaiah 6:9. So, he hardened Pharaoh’s heart, is equivalent to, his heart was hardened, Exodus 7:22. So, he moved David, 2 Samuel 24:1, ought to be translated, David was moved, namely, by his own evil heart, or Satan’s instigation, 1 Chronicles 21:1.

32. The priest… anoint — The Hebrew pontiff was at first designated as the anointed priest. Afterwards he was styled the great or high priest. See Leviticus 4:3, note. Consecrate — See Numbers 3:3, note.

33. The holy sanctuary — The holy of holies, as distinguished from the tabernacle of the congregation, the apartment of the priests. “The holy things were rendered unclean, not only by the sins of those who touched them, but by the uncleanness, that is, the bodily manifestation, of the sin of the nation; so that they required a yearly expiation and cleansing through the expiatory blood of sacrifice.” — Keil and Delitzsch. “Thus was the sanctuary cleansed from the defilement of priests and worshippers, and the communion of the Church with its Lord re-established. Alike priests and worshippers could now again have sacrificial access to and fellowship with God. It still remained to cleanse from personal guilt and sin. This was effected by the so-called ‘scapegoat.’” — Dr. Edersheim. The human nature of the Word made flesh in which he tabernacled (eskhnwsen) (John 1:14) and wrought out the work of human redemption, being absolutely holy, never needed purification, since in both flesh and spirit he was “holy, harmless, and undefiled.”

V. 34. This shall be an everlasting statute-By which were typified the two great gospel privileges; remission of sins, and access to God, both which we owe to the mediation of the Lord Jesus.

Verse 34. This shall be an everlasting statute — By which were typified the two great gospel privileges; remission of sins and access to God, both which we owe to the mediation of the Lord Jesus. He shall make an atonement — for all their sins — Meaning all such sins as could be expiated by the law, which were, ta agnohmata, the errors, or sins of ignorance of the people, as the apostle expresses it Hebrews 9:6, where he speaks of the atonement made on this day. “To this sort of offences alone,” as Dr. Doddridge justly observes on the verse just referred to, “and not to those presumptuously committed, the efficacy of the atonement extended.” And even to justification from these, as the Hebrew doctors justly observe, all these rites of expiation, however solemnly performed, availed nothing in the sight of God, without repentance, and sincere resolutions of new obedience. Now, the two great gospel duties of repentance and faith are hereby typified; by which we obtain an interest in the atonement made by the death of Christ, and come to be entitled to the benefit of it. By repentance we must afflict our souls — inwardly sorrowing for our sins, and living a life of self-denial and mortification. And we must make a penitent confession of sin, and that with an eye to Christ whom we have pierced. By faith we must put our hands on the head of the offering, relying on Christ as the Lord our righteousness; pleading his satisfaction, as that which was alone able to atone for our sins, and procure us a pardon, and with a hand of faith on his sacrifice, must assure ourselves that, if we confess and forsake our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. We may observe further here, that in the year of jubilee, the trumpet which proclaimed liberty was ordered to be sounded in the close of the day of atonement, Leviticus 25:9. For the remission of the debt we owe to God, our release from the bondage of sin, and our return to our inheritance above, are all owing to the mediation and intercession of Jesus Christ. By the atonement we obtain rest for our souls, and all the glorious liberties of the children of God.

34. For all their sins — Though this day is appointed by God as the day for the forgiveness of sins, no such end can be reached except by true repentance and the firm determination not to sin any more. As is stated in Tr. Yoma, 85 b: “He who yieldeth to sin in the supposition that the day of atonement will bring him forgiveness, will find no forgiveness on this day. And only the sins committed by man against God can be atoned for on this day; as to the sins, however, between man and man, this day is powerless to remove them until the offender has appeased the offended.” Since there were many sins and “errors” (Greek, ignorances, Hebrews 9:7) for which there had been no specific expiation in the Levitical code, and many which had been neglected, there was need of one general expiation once each year. See verse 9, note. “If the law were not spiritual, atonement would not be so absolutely necessary. That any one could keep the law, and thereby merit the favour of God, never entered the thought of the lawgiver. Its immediate purpose was only to excite a sense of the need of redemption. In this view, the law was only paidagwgov eiv Criston,” (a child-leader unto Christ.) — Hengstenberg. For a reply to Baehr’s denial of the substitutional nature of the Mosaic sacrifices, see Numbers 15, concluding note. “To a God of infinite benevolence, justice, and holiness, nothing can compensate for sin save the removal of sinfulness from the heart of the sinner; nothing make room for forgiveness save the establishment of a principle of daily life actually operating and assuring that removal. Wherefore the willing self-sacrifice of the innocent for the guilty is admissible in God’s plan of salvation, not as an end satisfactory in itself, but as a means for effecting that real, practical removal of sin by the destruction of sinfulness, which will justify a just and holy God for pardoning and forgetting the sins of the past. To this principle nothing else in the whole Mosaic ritual so plainly points as does the feast of atonement. In the death of its victims it repeated the daily lesson of bloody sacrifices; while in its liberated offering it set forth the crowning truth, that even self-sacrifice can expiate sins committed only in so far as it removes — ’sends away for Azazel’ — the disposition to commit sins.” — Geo. W. Cable. And he — that is, Aaron, to whom Moses was directed to communicate this command — did as the Lord commanded. This bit of history must have been added at least seven months after the dedication of the tabernacle, when Nadab and Abihu were slain and the precepts of this chapter were given. The first day of atonement was after the rebellion at Kadesh-Barnea. Compare Leviticus 9:23; 10:1, with Exodus 40:17, and Introduction to Numbers, (4.)

CONCLUDING NOTES.

(1.) “Although the Pentateuch from Exodus 30:10 to Numbers 29 contains allusions or references to the ‘great day,’ it is remarkable that its observance is not recorded in any other part of the Old Testament. Professor Dillmann has, in his commentary on Leviticus 16, convincingly shown that no argument can be drawn from this silence, the historical narratives being chiefly of popular feasts, whereas this fast specially attached to the sanctuary. The same eminent critic has satisfactorily accounted for the omission from passages where we might, perhaps, have expected mention of it. Indeed, to be logically consistent, the argument would require to take into account that we find no express record of it till the first century of our era. Acts 27:9, and Epistle to the Hebrews. Yet the description of the high priest, Simon the Just, in the Book of Sirach (Eccl. l) is undeniably that of his appearance on the day of atonement, which brings us to more than two centuries before Christ. But, indeed, so to state the argument is almost to reduce to absurdity the contention of those who would deny its ancient, and, as we are fully convinced, Mosaic institution.” — Dr. Edersheim.

(2.) The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews asserts (Hebrews 9:7) that the high priest went once every year into the most holy place, but an examination of verses 12-15 of this chapter will prove that there were at least three entrances. He entered first with a censer in one hand and incense in the other, so that he could not have carried the blood. Secondly, he entered with the blood of the bullock, which, according to tradition, a priest meanwhile had stirred lest it should coagulate. Thirdly, with the goat’s blood. Some think that he entered the fourth time to bring away the censer and the plate of incense. The most obvious way of harmonizing the statements of Moses and of the Epistle is to interpret the latter as meaning on one day every year.

(3.) The fact that the high priest was not permitted to sit down within the vail intimates that his work was never perfect, but must be ever renewed with the rolling years. “Every priest standeth offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this man,” Jesus Christ, “after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down on the right hand of God,” having forever perfected, as to the consciousness, them that are sanctified.

The momentary stay of the high priest in the holy of holies clearly typifies that the time had not come when every perfect believer in Jesus Christ might have the constant communion of the Holy Ghost, the abiding Comforter, his body having become an habitation of God through the Spirit. Jesus, our high priest, has entered heaven, his sanctuary above; and his successor, the Holy Spirit, has entered his holy of holies below — the believing heart.

(4.) The typology of the scapegoat is a subject beset with difficulties. No light is reflected upon it from the New Testament, for none of its writers allude to it. It becomes us to walk carefully on ground on which apostles have not ventured. The typical import of the scapegoat depends, first of all, upon its literal meaning. Professor Bush, interpreting the Azazel to signify an evil spirit, has an extended argument to prove that the sending of the goat into the wilderness, laden with sins, symbolizes the rejection of the apostate and reprobate race of Israel guilty of the crucifixion of the Messiah. But, since the live goat was part of the expiatory sin offering, this theory involves the contradiction that the Jews made propitiation for their sins by suffering the wrath of heaven, and, of course, that sinners will make propitiation for their sins while banished to hell! The ancient view, taken by Theodoret, Cyril, Augustine, and Procopius, is, that as the slain goat prefigures the crucifixion, so the living goat typifies the resurrection. But the dying, and not the risen, Christ bore the sins of men. Again, we find no similitude between heaven and the wilderness. Hence we cannot accept this theory, nor that which maintains that this ceremony was designed to ridicule the Egyptian superstition respecting Typhon, the spirit of evil, inhabiting the wilderness, by sending a cursed animal into his realm. It seems more reasonable to regard the scapegoat as symbolizing one aspect of the atonement made by Jesus Christ, since, in the fifth verse, both goats are “for a sin offering.” While the sprinkled blood sets forth the God-ward side of the atonement, the satisfaction of divine justice, the dismissed goat may represent the man-ward aspect of Christ’s expiatory work, the disburdening of the believer’s conscience through the forgiveness of his sins, and the assurance that they are separated from him as far as the east is from the west. The satisfaction of God, as a moral governor, having been made in secret by the high priest alone, it was important for the assurance of the people that there should be a visible transaction, embodying in a sensible form the results of the service, or the man-ward side. Professor Murphy sees in the returnless scapegoat an illustration of “the wider meaning of death in Scripture, which is not annihilation, but a state of ill-fare, in contrast with life, which is a state of well-fare, not terminated, but only fully entered upon, at the separation of the soul and body.

(5.) The whole number of sacrificial animals for this day was fifteen; two daily sacrifices, one bull, two rams, and seven lambs, all burnt offerings; two goats as sin offerings, one of which was eaten in the evening, the blood being sprinkled without; the other, the blood of which was sprinkled within the vail, was burnt; lastly, the high priest’s bull, as a sin offering, which was burnt.

Seven days before this service the high priest was shut up in the sanctuary, and kept away from his wife. Lest he might become ceremonially defiled, a deputy was appointed to act in his stead, if necessary. Elders of the high court read to him and instructed him in the ritual of this important day, and addressed him: “My lord, high priest! Read thou with thy mouth; perhaps thou hast forgotten or never learnt this point. We are delegates of the high court, but thou art delegate both for us and the high court; we conjure thee to make no change in any thing that we have said to thee.” The whole night before the day of atonement he either expounds the law or some one expounds it to him. If he is disposed to sleep, he is suddenly touched and admonished to arise and walk about. During the day’s service he underwent five baths and ten washings of consecration of hands and feet. For the extended ritual of the day of atonement used by the ancient Jews, and in part by the modern, see Delitzsch on the Epistle to the Hebrews, vol. ii, first appendix.

(6.) The requirement that no man should be in the tabernacle when the high priest entered the holy of holies on the great day of atonement, prefigures the fact that Jesus entered within the vail with his own blood without human eye-witnesses. Hebrews 9:12. We are left to conjecture the exact time when this important event took place. Several considerations point to the resurrection morning, just after Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene. 1.) The prohibition, “touch me not,” and the reason assigned, “for I am not yet ascended.” The high priest could touch no one before entering within the second vail, lest he touch an unclean person and contract defilement, disqualifying him for his office. One week afterwards Jesus invited Thomas to touch him. 2.) The message given to Mary, “Go unto my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father.” It will be noticed that this is in the present tense, “I ascend,” and not in the future. If the message related to the public ascension from the Mount of Olives, we see no urgency in this announcement, which Jesus had several opportunities of giving in person to the assembled apostles during an interval of forty days. 3.) The fact that the Spirit, which could not be given till Jesus was glorified, was given on the evening of the day of the resurrection, as a precursor of the Pentecost, (John 20:22,) implies that his glorification had already begun, and that the work of his office, as the atoning Saviour, was now completed. But the priestly act was not shedding the blood of the sacrifice, which was done by laymen, (Leviticus 1:5,) but sprinkling the blood. This was the great function of the high priest. This crowning act of the priesthood of Christ must have been accomplished before the Holy Spirit, the purchase of his blood, was bestowed. 4.) Since Jesus was both the sacrifice and the priest, he could not perform the great function of his office, the sprinkling of his own blood, until the resurrection had placed the great high priest’s diadem upon his brow. Hence the high probability that Jesus entered the holy of holies on the day of his resurrection, and presented his own blood at the earliest possible moment. See Bibliotheca Sacra, vol. i, p. 170.

(7.) “In the biblical text the account of that day follows immediately on the laws of purification. We might almost inscribe the various parts of that section as follows: 1.) Clean individually and personally. Leviticus 11. 2.) Clean in the family. Leviticus 12. 3.) Clean in the congregation. Leviticus 13-15:4.) Above and beyond all, the great cleansing of Israel and its sanctuary. Leviticus 16. Thus the first part of the Book of Leviticus, (chaps. 1-16,) which tells how Israel as a people must enter into communion with God, leads up to the second part, (chaps. 17 to the end,) which indicates how this communion is to be manifested and preserved.” — Dr. Edersheim.