Page images
PDF
EPUB

rest of the sacrifices, and the same ceremonies almost were observed. Only with this difference, that a holocaust could be offered by a stranger, that is, a profelyte of the gate. When St. Paul exhorts the Romans (b) to p-cnt their bodies unto God as a sacrifice, he undoubtedly alludes to the whole burnt-offerings, because the Christian religion requires a perfeá sacrifice; we must deny ourselves, and not set our affections upon this world. Of fin and tref. c.

or Propitiatory facrifices were of two forts, fome being for

· sin, and others for trespasses. What the difference between pafs offerings.

"Se these two was, is not agreed among the Jewish writers.

these two was, is not a All that can be made out from what they have said upon this point, is, that the sacrifice for sin is that which was offered for sins or offences committed through inadvertency, and undesignedly against a negative precept (*), or a prohibition of the law (i). And indeed it appears from scripture (k), that there was no facrifice or expiation for fins com. mitted wilfully, presumptuously, and out of defiance to the divine Majesty, and that such an offender was punished with death. As for trefpass-offerings, it is not well known neither what they were. It is however generally supposed that they were offered for sins of ignorance. So that the Hebrew word, which has been rendered fin, signifies such an offence as we are conscious of, but have committed undesignedly; and that which has been translated by trespass, denotes an action, concerning which we have reason to doubt whether it be sinful or not. But this, after all, is very uncertain, since both those words are promiscuously used. We shall therefore conclude this article, by obferving, that it is the opinion of the most learned among the Jews, those sacrifices could not really atone or make satisfaction for the fins of men. They were only deligned for a confession or remembrance of men's iniquities, and as a kind of intercession to God for the remission of them, who actually forgave them upon condition of repentance, without which there could be no remission. This is Philo's hotion of the matter (2). But St. Paul is very express upon this point, when to shew that the sacrifice of Jefus Christ was the substance and original of what was only prefigured by the sacrifices of the law, he says, the expiation and atonement of these last was only typical and figurative. Upon this head you may consult our preface on the epistle to the Hebrews.

Peace-offerings, or sacrifices of gratitude, are so named "3" because they were offered to God in hopes of obtaining fome favour from him, or as a thanksgiving for having received some signal mercy from his bountiful hand. In the first sense, they were termed salutary, that is, for safety, and in the second, they were called eucharistical, i. e. of thanksgiving, or facrifices of praise. Besides those that were appointed for festivals, and which were publick, there were

also (b) Rom. xii. 1. 1*) The Jews reckoned 365 negative precepts, and 248 affirmative ones. (i) Levit. iv. 2. Numb. xv. 27. (k) Ibid. ver. 30 -32. Heb. x. 26, &c. (2) Philo de Vic. Mol. I. 3. p. 51.

also some private ones. These were consecrated to God by a vows to crave some blessing from him, or else they were voluntary, to return him thanks for favours received. The first were of an indispensable obligation, upon account of the vow; in the others, men were left more at liberty. In scripture there are numberless instances of these two forts of facrifices (mn). In them the blood and entrails were burned upon the altar, the breast, or left shoulder belonged to the priest, and the rest of the flesh with the skin was for the person that made the offering. For this reason this kind of facrifice is by some Jewish authors called a sacrifice of retribution, because every one had his fhare of it.

We may rank among the peace-offerings that of the pafchal lamb, of which we design to give an account hereafter ; that of the firstborn, whether man or beast (11), and also the tenths of cattle. All these belonged to God, according to the law. The first-born of the children of Israel were offered to God as a memorial of his have ing spared the first-born of their forefathers in the land of Egypt'; but they were redeemed, and the price of their redemption given to the high-priest (0). As for clean beasts, they were offered to God in facrifice, and the flesh belonged to the priests (p). If the animal was unclean, a lamb was offered in his place, or else they struck off his head, but never sacrificed him (). The tithes of herds and of flocks were also by the Jews consecrated to God, as a thanksgiving for his have ing blessed their cattle (r).

It remains now that we should say a word or two Of oblations, or concerning unbloody sacrifices; which were, 1. The of- inanimate facriferings and libations; 2. first-fruits ; 3. tenths, and 4. fices. perfumes. Some offerings were accompanied with libations, as the whole burnt-offerings of four-footed beasts, and peace-offerings, but it was not so with propitiatory facrifices. This oblation consisted of a cake of fine flour of wheat, and in some cases of barley, kneaded with oil without leaven, with a certain quantity of wine and salt, and sometimes of frankincense. Besides these oblations that were joined with the bloody sacrifices, some were offered singly and apart; either for all the people on, feast-days, or for particular persons on different occasions. They were nearly the same with those that accompanied the facrifices of living creatures. Some oblations were made without any libation at all, as the omer or handful of corn that was offered at the feast of the paflover, the two loaves at the feast of Pentecost, and the shew-bread, of which an account hath been given before. We have but two or three things more to observe concerning the offerings. The first of which is, that the children of Israel were expressly forbidden to mix honey with them (s); the learned have accounted for this injunction several ways, but the most probable is that which makes it to have been given with a

design (m) Judg. xi. 30, 31. 2 Sam. xv. 7; 8. 2 Chron. xxix. 30, 31. Pfal. Ixvi. 13. 15. Jonah ii. 9. (n) Exod. xiii. 15. Numb. iii. 13.

(0) Numb, xviii, 15. (0) Exod. xii, 13.

(9) Ibid. ' (r) Levit, xxvii. 32.

) Levit, ii. 11. NA . .

[ocr errors]

probabied have accexpressly per The fortwo or the which an

hich makes it conjunction severaly with

to and frland date the Levithe Thal

design to distinguish the oblations of the Hebrews from those of the Egyptians, who were used to put honey with them (t). The second is, that in every oblation it was absolutely necessary there should be salt (u). To which law there are some allusions in the gospel (x). Thirdly, offerings were to be of unleavened bread (y), except the two loaves at the feast of Pentecost, which were leavened (z); but it is to be observed that these were not offered upon the altar. Of first-fruits.

... Besides the first-born of living creatures, which by the

*. law were consecrated to God, the first-fruits of all kinds of corn and fruit, were also appropriated to him (*), as of grapes, figs, pomgranates, and dates (a). The first-fruits of sheep's wool were also offered for the use of the Levites (6). The law doth not fix the quantity of these first-fruits. But the Thalmudists tells us, that liberal persons were wont to give the fortieth, and even the thirtieth ; and such as were niggardly, the sixtieth part. The first of these they called an oblation with a good eye, and the second an oblation with an evil eye. Which may serve to illustrate Jesus Christ's expression (c). These first-fruits were offered from the feast of Pentecost till that of Dedication, because after that time the fruits were neither so good, nor so beautiful as before (d). The Jews were forbidden to begin their harvest, till they had offered up to God the omer, that is, the new sheaf, which was done after the day of unleavened bread, or the (e) Passover. Neither were they allowed to bake any bread made of new corn, till they had presented the new loaves upon the altar on the day of Pentecost, without which all the corn was looked upon as profane and unclean (). To this St. Paul alludes when he says, “If the first-fruit be holy, the lump is also holy (*).” The first-fruits belonged to the priests and their families, which brought them a large income, as hath been observed by Philo (g). We have in Deuteronomy and Josephus an account of the ceremonies that were observed at the offering of the first-fruits. Tenths.

. After the first-fruits had been offered to God, every one paid

er the tenths of what he possessed to tke Levites for the support of themselves and their families (h). The antiquity of this custom of paying tithes to those that are appointed to wait at the altar, is manifest from the instance of Abraham, who gave Melchisedek tithes of all the spoil he had taken from the kings of Canaan (i), and from that of Jacob, who promised to give God the tenth of all he should procure by his blesfing (k). As it is supposed that in those early times the priesthood be

longed

(0) To which may be added, that the bee was ranked among the unclean animals. (u) Levit. ii. 13.

(1) Mark ix. 49, 50. Colof. iv. 6. (y) Levit. ii. 11.

() Lev. xxiii. 17. (*) But were not burnt upon the altar. See Levit. ii. 12. (a) Numb. xv. 7. xviii. 12, 13. Deut. xxvi. 2. Nehem, x. 35. (6) Deut. xvii. 4.

(c) Matth. xx. 15. id) The feast of dedication was in December. " (c) Levit. xxii, 10, 14. (f) Jof. Antiq. iii. 10. **) Rom. xi. 16.

(8) Philo de præmis facerdotum. (?) Nun:b. xviii. 21. ) Gen. xiv. 20. (k) Gen, xxvii. 22.

this it was that as such, he blefied was the first-born:

longed to the first-born of every family (1), some have asserted, with a great deal of probability, that Melchisedek was the first-born of the children of Noah; that as such, he blefied Abraham; and with a regard to this it was, that Abraham gave him tithes of all : for what is said by the author of the epiftle to the Hebrews (in), that “ Melchisedek was without father, without mother, without descent," &c. must be understood in a mystical sense, as we have observed in our comment on that place. By it is not meant that Melchifedek had no father nor mother, but only that there is no account in fcripture of the parents and genealogy of any person under the name of Melchifedek. The Levites gave to the priests the tenths of their own tithes (n).

When these tithes were paid, the owner of the fruits gave besides another tenth part of them, which was carried up to Jerusalem, and eaten in the temple, as a sign of rejoicing and gratitude towards God (). These were a kind of agape, or love feasts; and these are what we find named the second tithes (). Lastly, there were tithes allotted to the poor, which the Levites, like the rest, were obliged to pay, because they were in possession of some cities. Besides which there was appointed for the sustenance of the poor, a corner in every field, which it was not lawful to reap with the rest (9), and they were also allowed such ears of corn, or grapes, as dropt or were scattered about, and the sheaves that might happen to be forgotten in the field. Tithes were paid of all the products of the earth in general (r), but chiefly of corn, wine, and oil, We learn from the gospel, that the Pharisees affected to be scrupulously exact in paying tithe of every the least herb (s). The perfumes which were offered to God in the temple bee pe

Perfumes. ing a kind of oblations, it will be proper to give an account of them here. These perfumes are stiled in the Revelation, “ the prayers of the saints (t),” because they were an emblem and representation of them, for all the people were praying while the priest burned the perfumes. These consisted of several sweet-smelling spices, which are fpecified in the law. They offered them once a year in the Holy of Holies, on the great day of expiation (u); and twice every day, viz. morning and evening, in the sanctuary.

Vows partake of the nature both of facrifices and oblations, o because people could devote to God both living creatures and inanimate things. They may be divided into two general parts; that is, 1. Into vows whereby men bound themselves to abstain from things otherwise lawful, as of such and such a kind of food, clothes, or actions; and 2. Into those vows whereby either persons or things were devoted to God. Of the first fort was the vow of the Rechabites, of which we have taken an occasion to speak before. That of the Nazarites (x)

did

[ocr errors]

(1) Origen in Job. Hieronym. ad Evagr. (m) Hebr. vii. 3.
(n) Numb. xviii. 28. Nehem. X. 38. Deut. xiv. 23, 27.
(0) Jof. Antiq. iv.7.

() Deut. xii. 17. .
(9) Lev. xix. 9. Deut. xxiv. 19.

(r) Nchem. xiii. 5, 10, (5) Matth. xxiii. 23.

(-) Rev. v. 8. Lukei, 10. (u) Exod. xxx. 7, 8. Lev. xvi. 12, 13. (-:-) The word Nazarite signifies in Hebrew a person fet afart, or corsecrared. did partake of both; for they were persons consecrated to God, and their vow consisted of several kinds of abitinence. There were two forts of them (!), some being consecrated to God, for their whole liie, as Samson, Samuel, John the Baptist, &c. and others only for a time, i.e. for thirty days at least. Some authors inser from two passages in the Acts (z), that St. Paul was a Nazarite of the second kind. In one of these places it is said, that St. Paul had his head shorn at Cenchrea, because he had made a vow; but that could not well be the vow of 2 Nazarite;, since, after it, he would not have had his head shorn at Cenchrea, which was a sea-port near Corinth, but at jerusalem, according to the law, and even in the temple, or at least in the holy land. It is then more likely that this was some other vow, which the apostle had bound himself by. In the other pallage it is not faid that St. Paul had made any vow, but only he is therein advised to bear the expence of the sacrifices, which four of his companions, who had engaged themselves by a vow, were to offer. This is the fense we have followed in our note on that place, in which we have rather chosen to leave the matter undecided, than advance any thing uncertain. By what the fcripture says of the vow of the Nazarites, one would think that it is more antient than the ceremonial law; for the legislator does not injoin or command it, but only prescribes what ceremonies are to be used by those that shall make it. The Nazarites were chieily bound to observe these four particulars, which have by the Rabbins been subdivided into feveral others. 1. To abstain from wine, strong drink, and vinegar, and from all intoxicating liquor in general, or any thing of the like nature; 2. To wear long hair, and let no razor come on their heads (a); 3. To take care not to pollute themselves by touching, or going near a dead body, even though it were their own father or mother (6), and to purify themselves, when they happened to do it unawares; 4. To offer some certain facrifices, to shave their heads, and fling their hair into the fire, when the time appointed by their vow was expired. There was in the temple a room set apart for that use.

Of all the vows recorded in holy scripture, there is none more remarkable, or that hath more puzzled commentators, than that whereby Jephthah bound himself to offer unto the Lord for a burnt-offering, whatsoever should come forth of the doors of his house to meet him, when he returned in peace from fighting against the children of Ammon (c). Jephthah's design was undoubtedly to present unto God an acceptable, and consequently a lawful offering. Otherwise it would have been not only an impious, but a rash action; since his aim was hereby to induce God to profper his expedition against the Ammonites. Besides Jephthah is no where represented as a profane or irreligious person. The scripture testifies, on the contrary, that the spirit of God

was

(1) Numb. vi. 2.

(z) Atts xviii. 18. xxi. 23, 24, 26. (a) The Egyptian priests were wont to keep their heads constantly shaved.

(b) From whence it follows, that the Nazarites were holier than the com. mon priests. Lev. xxi. 2.

(c) Judg. xi. 31.

« PreviousContinue »