3

God as recognised his existence, his authority, and his power. But the faith by which Abel was enabled to offer the better sacrifice was directed to the promise of a Redeemer; (Heb. xi, 39;) and was manifested, in a very conspicuous manner, by the performance of a strange and unnatural ceremony, in obedience, as we may reasonably suppose, to a divine command. It is generally believed, that the divine approbation of Abel's sacrifice was displayed by the breaking forth of a miraculous fire, which consumed the accepted victim; for it is evident, from the subsequent account of Cain, that the preference of his brother's offering to his own was indicated by some intelligible

3 Gen iv, 3-7. “And, in process of time, (DPP) it came to pass that

Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock, and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel, and to his offering (); but unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth, and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted (or have the excellency ? and if thou doest not well, sin () lieth at the door: and unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him." There are good reasons for believing that , in this passage, does not signify sin, but a sin-offering—a sense which that substantive very frequently assumes, especially in the writings of Moses, vide Exod. xxix, 14; Lev. iv, 8. 20. 24, 25. vi, 25. x, 19. xiv, 13. 19, &c.; for, in the first place, the participle 7, with which it is here constructed, is masculine, for which circumstance we cannot well account, except on the ground that (itself a feminine substantive) here denotes the male animal to be slain in sacrifice; and, secondly, the root, which does not appear to be very intelligible as connected with "sin," is properly descriptive of the lying down or couching of an animal: see Gen. xlix, 9; Isa. xiii, 21. xvii, 2; Ezek. xix, 2; Zeph. ii, 14. This slight change in the version of the passage, removes the obscurities in which it is otherwise involved. Cain having noticed the Lord's preference of Abel's sacrifice, is evidently jealous lest he should lose his preeminence and authority over his younger brother. The Lord, therefore, says to him, "If thou doest well, shalt thou not have the excellency? and if thou doest not well, a sacrifice for sin lieth even at thy door; (that is, to atone for thy sin) and his desire (or deference) shall still be towards thee, and thou shalt rule over him."

Cain and Abel are described as presenting their offerings "in process of time,” or rather "at the end of days," which is the literal meaning of the Hebrew,

.מקץ

This expression appears to denote some fixed recurring period, at which it was ordained that sacrifice should be offered. Both their offerings are called Mincha, a term which, under the law, usually described the meat-offering of flour. But, here the word has evidently its more general sense of an offering or sacrifice— donum, oblatio: vide Simonis lex. in voc. This passage is ably discussed in Magee's "Discourses and Dissertations on the Atonement," 3rd. ed. vol. ii, p. 235.

AND AFTER THE FLOOD.

395

sign; and, from various passages in the history of the Old Testament, we learn that this was the sign by which Jehovah usually condescended to "testify" of the "gifts" of his servants: see Gen. xv, 17; Lev. ix. 24; Jud. xiii, 19, &c.; comp. Heb. xi, 4. If this is true, so admirable a mark of divine favour, while it excited the jealousy of Cain, must have amply confirmed the conviction of Abel, that, in shedding the blood of an innocent lamb, (notwithstanding all the strangeness of the action) he had been fulfilling a religious duty, and had been acting in strict conformity with the will of his Creator.

The next sacrifice, mentioned in Scripture, is that offered by Noah. After he had come forth from the ark, with his sons, and his sons' wives with him, we read, that he "builded an altar unto the Lord, and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt-offerings on the altar." Now, that this sacrifice, also, was acceptable to that Being to whom the beasts, and the fowls, as well as their lordly master, owed their existence, is plainly recorded. "And the Lord smelled a sweet savour (or a savour of rest)," says the sacred historian; " and the Lord said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake:" Gen. viii, 20, 21. When Abraham returned from Egypt, and dwelt in the plain of Mamre, he there built an altar, (i. e., literally, a place to slay

4 The sacrifice of a harmless beast must have appeared the more strange in the view of Abel, because there is reason to believe that, before the flood, animals were not permitted to be slain for the sustenance of man. The green herb and the fruits of the trees were given to Adam and his posterity for their food. "Behold," said Jehovah, "I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed, to you it shall be for meat:" Gen. i, 29. And that vegetable food alone was, at that time, allowed to our species, is evident from the reference made to this original grant of the green herb, when, after the flood, another grant was added of birds, beasts, and fishes-"Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you: even as the green herb, have I given you all things:" Gen. ix, 3.

396

SACRIFICES MADE

victims on) to the Lord: Gen. xiii, 18. This was an obvious evidence, that the rite of animal sacrifice was continued among those descendants of Noah who constituted, at that early period, the visible church of God; and it was in obedience to the direct command of Jehovah (as every reader of the Bible must remember) that, on a subsequent occasion, Abraham bound his son Isaac on Mount Moriah, and was about to sacrifice him there, when the Angel of the covenant stayed his hand, and provided him with a ram caught in the thicket for a burnt-offering to the Lord, instead of his child: Gen. xxii, 1-13.6 No doubt, it was on the same general principle, and in compliance with the same original institution, that animals were slain in sacrifice, by Jacob, by Moses and the Israelites, by Jethro, and by Balaam: see Gen. xlvi, 1; Exod. x, 25; xviii, 12; Num. xxiii, 1.

But, of the sacrifices which were offered by the servants of the one God, independently of the Jewish law, I know of none which cast a clearer light on our present subject than those which are recorded in the history of Job, who probably lived in Arabia at a period anterior to the promulgation of that law. We read that, after Job's sons and daughters had been entertaining one another in their houses," Job sent, and sanctified them, and rose up early in the morning, and offered burnt-offerings according to the number of them all; for Job said, It may be that my sons have sinned, and cursed God in their hearts. Thus did Job continually:" Job i. 5. Again, at the close of

מזבח 5

6 That Abraham, and those with whom he lived, were accustomed to the rite of animal sacrifice, more especially appears from the question addressed by Isaac to his Father, while they were on the way to Mount Moriah, "Behold," said Isaac, "the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for a burnt-offering?" Gen. xxii, 7.

BY JOB AND HIS FRIENDS.

397

the book, we find the Almighty himself commanding a similar sacrifice. "The LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends; for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath. Therefore, take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt-offering, and my servant Job shall pray for you, for him will I accept; lest I deal with you after your folly, in that ye have not spoken of me the thing which is right, like my servant Job. So Eliphaz the Temanite, and Bildad the Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite, went and did according as the Lord commanded them:" xlii, 7-9.

be

The sacrifices which were offered in the church of God, before the law, appear to have been all of one description. They were burnt-offerings; and this appellation was given to them, because every part of the victim, after its blood had been poured forth, and except the skin and its appurtenances, was consumed with fire upon the altar. Now, that these sacrifices were in their nature expiatory, and not as some persons have imagined, merely eucharistical, may concluded, for various reasons. For, in the first place, the slaughter of the animal was obviously significant of the death merited by the transgressions of the offerer. Secondly, the sacrifices of the heathen nations of antiquity (which may be regarded as a corrupt imitation of these original burnt-offerings) were, for the most part, notoriously rites of deprecation or atonement. Thirdly, the same character attached (as we shall presently find occasion to observe) to the burnt-offerings enjoined by the Mosaic law; and, lastly, in the sacrifice of Noah, which was apparently

398

SACRIFICES OF THE JEWISH LAW.

intended to deprecate a repetition of the divine vengeance, and in the offerings of Job and his friends, which were expressly directed to the purpose of expiation, we have examples, which, in the total absence of all opposite testimony, must be considered as casting a clear light on the true signification of these rites in general.

But, while it would be unreasonable to deny the expiatory character of these sacrifices, the doctrine of Scripture ought never to be forgotten, that "the blood of bulls and of goats" cannot "take away sin:" Heb. x, 4. And when, with these historical accounts of the burnt-offerings of Abel, of Noah, of Abraham, of Jacob, and of Job, we compare the doctrine of the New Testament, that the blood of Jesus Christ alone cleanses man from iniquity, we must surely allow that all these sacrifices did but typify the foreordained sacrifice of the Holy One of Israel; and that whatever they possessed of piacular virtue is to be traced exclusively to that great reality of which they were the shadows.

Now, the doctrine which rests on these powerful probabilities, as it relates to the offerings of the servants of God, before the Mosaic institution, may be regarded as fixed and ascertained, with respect to the sacrificial ordinances of the Jewish ceremonial law.

Of that law, sacrifice was, indeed, the distinguishing feature; and, while the variety, particularity, and strictness, of the edicts delivered on the subject, served the purpose of occupying the attention, and of correcting the idolatrous tendencies, of a carnal people,. the whole system was fraught with allusion to the Christian doctrine of atonement..

Immediately after the delivery of the law, from Mount Sinai," Moses wrote all the words of the Lord,

7