In this chapter sin is entered-man's sin is shown-so that the free intercourse with glory in connection with flesh is impossible. But this brings in the connection with Israel in a new way-atonement, the full savor of Christ in connection with death, and the total putting away of sin (not merely bearing sins, and forgiveness of them) so that there was an absolute standing on that ground before God. Then an actual subsequent bearing away the sins of Israel, and a cleansing of the heavenly things also-a wider work than blessing without in virtue of sacrifice.
Christ is presented in the double character, for the nation and for Aaron and his house, and as to Israel as with the bullock for the Lord's lot, and then the bearer away of the people's sins—so it was Christ was offered, and died for the nation, but for the gathering of the Church also; afterward the sins of Israel will be practically removed. When the bullock is offered for Aaron and his house, the whole and perfect atonement is made, and for it the whole personal savor of Christ's offering ascends up, and the blood for others is presented in connection with that, "He has put away sin by the sacrifice of himself"—no doubt bearing our sins, but the truth intimated here is not so much the forgiveness of particular sins, as the total abolition of sin as between us and God by atonement, so that we stand on this blessed ground with God—it is the only one on which a sinner can-though in an inferior order, the goat, not the bullock. It is the same for Israel—Christ has made atonement, or they could not be blessed.
Then further, the whole scene is purged; this is a new feature, connected with Christ's going through the heavens in the virtue of His blood, and purifying the whole scene, to make it the place of His universal dominion and display of glory—not merely suffer that Israel might be blessed—but that blood be carried within, and the redemption of the Church, the purifying of all things wrought out, and the blessing of Israel flow from that height and be in connection with it.
Then afterward when Aaron comes out, the people's actual sins are administratively removed, and they can be freely blessed. This diminishes the direct application of the scapegoat to us; but besides that, we enter into and anticipate all that is true of Israel, as grafted into the tree of promise, and that Christ's bearing of sins is thus applied, yet I believe only positively spoken of in Peter and the Hebrews, where the Jew is first; yet it is as propitiation formally, in general, extended to the whole world; 1 John 2. This gives a much fuller character to the work of Christ for us, while it leaves not the smallest cloud on the truth that He washed us from our sins in His own blood, for sin is totally put away—our standing-place is without it before God. It is not merely sins administratively removed at a given epoch when Christ comes out, but we enter into the holiest completely purged. It is a full, heavenly, sinless qualification we now possess, "made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light." No doubt fundamentally the same work is done for Israel, or they could not be blessed, but we go within with Aaron; their sins are, as I have said, administratively removed when he comes out.
The purification in the sanctuary was a distinct part of the great day of atonement; the cleansing of the outer sanctuary distinct. The burnt-offering came afterward quite distinct; nobody was to be in the outer sanctuary, when the high priest went through the cleansing of the inner-that was the essential substantive thing, the blood being brought to the throne, as the Lord's lot, and that was done for himself and his house (the priest's) and all the congregation of Israel. Verse 16 comes in by the bye. There was to be a cleansing of the place-that had been done for the most Holy when the blood was brought in, and it was to be done for the tabernacle- outside there was no such cleansing. In verse 18 he comes to the cleansing of the outer sanctuary, so that what was cleansed was the sanctuary itself, the blood being sprinkled before God Himself and on His throne, for Aaron, his house, and all the people, and during this time, no one was to come into the outer. Then he went out of the sanctuary, and cleansed the altar of incense, i.e., all was cleansed when man approached to God—not when man was cleansed by God. The tabernacle as the place of approach was cleansed; then came the putting the sins out of sight, quite another matter but connected. And then as a distinct service, in other garments, the service of offering outside. Nor was there any specific cleansing of the candlestick and table-they were not approaching-places.
I notice with much interest lately that cleansing, on the great day of atonement, referred only to the tabernacle itself and what was in it-not to the court or what was there. Here only the blood was carried into the holiest of all. But as to cleansing, the heavenly places alone are in view—this is full of interest; there was a cleansing away of sins on Azazel, but that was a distinct part (not as to Christ, separated in His work-the goats were one Christ) but it was a different subject-sins put away, but no approach in that to the sanctuary. And as to the holy of holies, the witness still there that the way was not open. Still, though only the shadow not the image of the things to come was there, the principle of entrance in peace into the presence of God was there-the blood was on the propitiatory. This was a thing wholly apart from all regular Jewish offerings, none of which contemplated entrance there. But what was done, was cleansing everything within, because God was there; it was apart, unconnected with any other sacrifices. When it was complete, the high priest offered burnt-offerings-but they were no part of this service. This, too, was not available for an occasion—it was effectual for God Himself, here only for a year no doubt, but cleansed all around Him for Himself, for what He was, and when all was revealed was an eternal redemption, an eis to dienekes.
But the point I am now upon, is that it applied, only to what figured the heavenly places. The red heifer was apart as a sacrifice, and was connected with approach to God, but for those who could still defile themselves where death was, and in this sense outside; but it was for particular defilement of man, which his conscience must take notice of as approaching God, but was of water to restore communion, though founded on blood and the consuming of sin, but blood only sprinkled where the people met God, outside. It was for the actual defilement of man, not what affected God's presence where He was; it came in, in a supplementary way, for man in his relationship to God where he could defile himself, hence is found in the book of Numbers-the wilderness journey. It was an outside thing, though of course referring to our relationship with God. Hence it is found in the Hebrews, just alluded to as a supplementary thing.
In Hebrews we are always weak individuals, in the wilderness, with access to God in the holiest where the High Priest is, only sitting down there.
The scape-goat referred to actual clearing and putting the sins away, so that they were not found again, hence applied to Israel (though of course it was for us). But it is only the outer part—we are looked at as responsible, according to our Adam standing in this world—our intercourse with God as human beings. But within was where God's presence was- not exactly our Father's house, but being where God reveals Himself-where all is according to His nature, and what is in heaven is revealed to us, " What eye hath not seen, God has revealed unto us by his Spirit," indeed, now there is no veil; as to our entering in, it is the to agia. But this is properly our place, and note here that there was no Azazel bullock. No doubt our sins are put away-Scripture, thank God, is full of it—but our characteristic relationship is cleansing for God, for His presence. Christ has spoken what He knew, and testified what He had seen, and by the Holy Ghost we follow Him there where He is gone, not without blood too; and that is what we belong to, and what belongs to us. We start with learning what God is for us down here, and all is forgiven, and we are redeemed out of this world, though in it, and we belong, by the purchase of Christ, to the place where He is.
Thus I would remark first that the cloud of sweet incense and the bullock seem our proper way and ground of acceptance—the two goats, Israel's; though we come in, as regards our guilt, in the same way, but the other is our own proper ground, i.e., the personal acceptance of Christ, and God perfectly glorified in His offering-not merely bearing our sins away. That meets need, and blessed it is that it does, still there is that which glorifies God as to sin, and divine favor in which. Christ stands, and in which we are accepted, and this is where we are before God, the sweet savor of Christ, and God glorified as to sin, as only through the sacrifice of Christ, not bearing sins, but according to John 13-this part the Jews have not. Their blessing, no doubt in a general sense, is founded on it, and the blood of the goat was put on the mercy-seat, as well as the sins carried away; but though Christ must be there that they may be blessed, they are not in His blessing—standing before God in the virtue of it, as He does.
8. As regards Azazel-the word is pretty plain I think,
I have heretofore noticed it; Ez, the goat-Azal (to depart) in whom the sins fail and disappear-and this is practically, I suppose, the force of eretz g'zerah (a land of separation), to fail, to be removed, perish, excluded. The sins disappeared wholly-they were sent off, and so gone to the land where no man was-they were lost. The use of the two words, only thus used here, is remarkable, for the total disappearance of sins, never to be found—there was no one there to seek for or find them. Just as in the Jewish idea, death removed man from this world, and then there was no remembrance, it was a non est as to this world—so the sins, they were gone, and were not, not to be found, like Rachel's children though not longed for.
The fact that there is no scape-bullock seems to me to depend upon the fact that they were priests. Hence, though in the necessarily imperfect shadowing of the law, it was only approach that was in question, qua priests we are not guilty sinners—for such, the actual sins must be cleared away—as priests we draw nigh, and that with boldness into the holiest now, because Christ has perfected the work which brings us there-for us once for all, and we have no more conscience of sins.
It seems to me that though I doubt not that the blessed Lord in bearing our sins held the place of Aaron as representing the people and confessing their sins on Azazel-not properly a priestly but a representative office (for priestly was in ability to approach God when others could not, and here he took their place as sinners)—yet Heb. 5:9, 109And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him; 10Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec. (Hebrews 5:9‑10), points out distinctly that He was established as High Priest, only after His sufferings, " being made perfect," i.e., having been passed through His consecration by the things which He suffered, He became, and is thus and then saluted of God a High Priest—God publicly owns Him thereon.
I certainly think, as to the strict application of it (for as to efficacy, whatever efficacy there is in Christ's offering we have, and what is true of the Jew we have) yet as to the letter, the bullock for Aaron and his house is for us, the scape-goat is for the Jews. Aaron and his house were atoned for by themselves by the bullock, as directed indeed in chapter 4. The sacrifice was of greater value, of weightier import than that for Israel. But this is not all-this was complete before there was any purifying of things and places—Aaron and his house are purified by themselves; and in the case of the goat the blood was sprinkled on the mercy-seat, and atonement made for Israel also before the cleansing began. Then, in the Lord's lot, begins the putting the blood on places, before Azazel. It makes atonement, and purifies the holy place and altar, defiled by the uncleanness of Israel. It was Godward, the nature of sin as uncleanness in His sight; with this the places were all cleansed (the heavenly with better sacrifices) but the only thing mentioned in the first goat is the places—no doubt in respect of the uncleannesses of the children of Israel, as affecting God and His presence. No doubt thus death had come in and a sin-offering, but it met God, and after the reconciliation of the heavenly saints, the places were reconciled; and then last of all, when the high priest had confessed Israel's sins, Azazel was taken to the land not inhabited. And this confirms the order of power-first the Church received, then the heavenly places cleansed, and then Israel reconciled; there is the Church, the reconciling the heavenly things, and Israel. There are other precious differences elsewhere noticed, but this as to the proper order of application.
14. Notice that on the great day of atonement, the blood was sprinkled seven times on the mercy-seat, and upon the altar (v. 19)-as of the red heifer at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, once as far as appears on the mercy-scat.
Note.-The blood of the offerings for sin for priest and congregation was sprinkled before the veil; on the great day of atonement it was on the mercy-seat; in ordinary cases on the altar of burnt-offering. This would make it communion, but it puts the people (through the priests) in the holy place. At any rate the congregation must be fit to be represented there by them-fit for that place. Personally they came no nearer than before the altar of burnt-offering; there consequently their sin-offering was offered.
Note.-We have in fact the blood on the mercy-seat, and the scape-goat in Rom. 3 and 4; only the Lord's lot is set out in testimony for us as guilty to come, an hilasterion (mercyseat) through faith in His blood-the scape-goat is as delivered for our offenses (and raised again for our justification) and propitiation, though in view of God's glory (among whom I dwell), still is for sins as 1 John 2. The Lord's lot was a sin-offering, though not for particular acceptance or restoration, but, in general, for God who was there.
15. The sprinkling on and before the mercy-seat had its own efficacy before the Lord, but the cleansing then began with the holy place, etc. It may be they were sprinkled, with blood certainly, if Heb. 9:2121Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. (Hebrews 9:21) applies to this, but that may be doubted; otherwise it is said only of the mercy-seat and of the altar before the Lord, i.e., the altar of incense. Atonement was made for the places, but specific mention of blood could perhaps only be on the mercy-seat and altar.
The altar of incense was to be sprinkled (Ex. 30:1010And Aaron shall make an atonement upon the horns of it once in a year with the blood of the sin offering of atonements: once in the year shall he make atonement upon it throughout your generations: it is most holy unto the Lord. (Exodus 30:10)); but when the tabernacle was set up it would seem it was not sprinkled with blood (Ex. 40:99And thou shalt take the anointing oil, and anoint the tabernacle, and all that is therein, and shalt hallow it, and all the vessels thereof: and it shall be holy. (Exodus 40:9); chap. 30: 26, etc.); the brazen altar seems to have been cleansed with blood; Ex. 29:3636And thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a sin offering for atonement: and thou shalt cleanse the altar, when thou hast made an atonement for it, and thou shalt anoint it, to sanctify it. (Exodus 29:36). The sprinkling with blood and cleansing leads to the judgment that it was so done with all (the altar of incense certainly) on the day of atonement. Moses' doing it would not mean more than its being done under the law; but the connection with Sinai (Heb. 9:1919For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, (Hebrews 9:19)) tends to show that it was then, and not recorded in the Old Testament. Still Heb. 9:2121Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. (Hebrews 9:21) gives no clear judgment that it was at the setting up; verse 22 clearly generalizes it, so that we may suppose he was already beyond Sinai.
-18. The question then arises, what is the altar here? In verse 20 the tabernacle of the congregation is said positively to be reconciled. The altar cleansed was the altar of incense, the altar before the Lord (see chapter 4: 6, 18). This changes the character; this reconciliation (ka-phar) to make atonement, was of the places where they went to God (only by priests). It was the holy place or sanctuary, the tabernacle and the altar. Aaron was to sprinkle the blood on the mercy-seat and before it; He makes atonement for himself and for all Israel- he makes atonement for the brazen altar before the Lord, i.e., reconciles it, but it is not said of the mercy-seat. In verse 17 he makes atonement for himself and house, and for all Israel; he makes atonement in it (verse 16) for the holy place, but not for the mercy-seat, but he does specifically for the altar; it was the idea of the people approaching The altar without was not the place of approaching, save as under sin; the atonement was made there-the sacrifice, whose blood was to work thus efficaciously, was offered there-but it was distinctly the place of approach that was cleansed. The place of approach and of offered incense-the mercy-seat-was what they approached, blood was put on it and before it for them. The altar without was the place where, when offering was made, the thing, as far as man was concerned, to come there with was sin. Hence we have blood put on the mercy-seat, atonement for Aaron and Israel, the cleansing of the holy place, tabernacle, and altar; then putting Israel's sins on Azazel.
It gives an absolute character to our reconciliation which Israel's has not, though in substance it is just the same. Christ was made sin for us-the whole thing is put away. It is not a question of dealing with sins-that of course would have been, if this work had not been done; but Christ intercepts this, and God's righteousness is now declared, in which we stand to start with, by faith, and are, always in. No doubt we are made to feel our sins as a means of discovering our state, but this is only the way of getting at it-we are all under sin, in this condition before God. I learn it by my sins, or much more deeply by my sinfulness, and then find I am made the righteousness of God. In Israel there is a dealing with particular transgressions. No doubt if Christ had not atoned for all our sins we could not have been the righteousness of God in Him-He did, Scripture says it, abundantly, thank God, but He was made sin and glorified God as in, and about it. But it is done, and we stand in righteousness in the efficacy of His work.
But Israel has to meet God about the transgressions they have been guilty of-suffer about them-feel Reuben to be guilty about their brother-transgressors, and God dealing with them as His people about their transgressions. It is surely practically true of us, yet not as His people who have sinned as such, but as merely and wholly sinners, and nothing else. Hence Israel has to feel in a special way that their sins, when they had to say to them, had been laid on the head of the scape-goat. My whole place is changed to be owned as righteous in Christ before God-Christ my righteousness; of course if He had not done the work on the cross I could not be, still I come in from a place of utter sin and alienation into divine righteousness. The truth is the same-the manner and circumstances are different. Indeed we have the bullock of atonement, they the goat-yet Christ for both, and Christ ever perfect in His work.
The question whether the altar before the Lord which was sprinkled was that of incense or of burnt-offering does not affect the general teaching of the passage. See verse 12, also Exodus 3o: to. My impression is that verse 12 is the altar of incense, see Exodus 3o: to; but it does not affect what is the important part of the question, I only add some fruits of further research.
The distinction of judicial righteousness connected with responsibility, and our approach to God according to what He is, is of all moment. This last connects itself with the purpose of God, Christ's delight in the sons of men before the Creation, and before the responsibility; but it is not that side that is treated here, but the nature of God, and access to Him as such. Israel stood formally in the place of responsibility, the law being the perfect rule of it; it was their standing as to the present government of, and relationship with God. That could not be, it is true-that is, forgiveness and purgation from sins-if what God was had not been glorified; and the Lord's lot was offered (in this case only the blood was brought into the holiest) and our responsibility is also met as we know, thank God. He gave Himself for our sins, " died for our sins according to the Scriptures "; but it was Israel's place as such, though in spirit we get the good of the new covenant, but then what characterizes us more is our approach to God within, not merely being in Christ, but as regard's God's nature and presence, the bullock marks our place-we have died with Christ, are not, in faith, in the old creation; it is not our politeuma (citizenship). It is more than the needed basis of forgiveness-it is justification of life. The bullock-offering is our whole position and present relationship, our calling is heavenly, and we have boldness to enter into the holiest by the new and living way. It is " quickened together with him, having forgiven us all trespasses," though here it is not the life, but the ground of acceptance-but it is in death and resurrection, beyond and out of the old creation. He was made sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. Hence too remark that, when the blood was carried into the sanctuary, the bodies were burned without the camp, a religion of man, as in this world, did not consist with it. It is death to the world-and heaven. This is a most immensely important point. The Epistle to the Hebrews is just leading them from one to the other; till then they had united both-served the tabernacle-it could not be.
The putting the blood on the mercy-seat was meeting God in respect of sin in the essence of His Being in death the fruit of sin-a wondrous truth! It was when made sin and bearing its curse, forsaken of God and dying that Man's obedience was perfect, and love to the Father in Jesus, and that wherein God's righteousness against sin, and supreme love to sinners was manifested. In the place of sin, as made it (and God Himself was perfectly glorified, John 13), obedience was perfect. Then the sprinkling seven times before the mercyseat was the perfection of its effect for our approach. This sevenfold sprinkling therefore was done on the altar of incense -God was not seated there. The scape-goat met responsibility and judgment founded, of course, on the blood of the other, but the first part gave access to God as He is, and the fitness of incense service, and this is truly blessed. The scape-goat was, first of all, Israel as an earthly people on earthly ground, in the flesh, but of course applicable to us (as Isa. 53), but to us as having been on this ground, guilty as sinners in the flesh by what the flesh produced; but now out of it, all that gone, not in the flesh, and as to that perfected forever; and so now standing on the ground of the blood within, with " boldness to enter into the holiest "-not justified without merely, but " made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light "-so that while the positive preciousness of the blood remains for God Himself, yet it is not contrast with a state of guilt, but positive joy and worship where there is none.
Peter does not go beyond redemption out of where we were, and bearing our sins, and so dead to sins, man suffers in the flesh, is not dead-he has the Red Sea fully, blessed perfectness of work too, but not I think the Jordan. i Peter i: 3 is the Red Sea, but we are in the wilderness, though with a lively hope; hence of course the appearing is what is before us. Christ is ready to judge, and God's government on the earth is treated of; he reaches the " Day-star " as an extreme point of hope, and " the day of the Lord will come."
John 1e., in his Epistle (see before as to his Gospel), is a different class of teaching-it is Christ's, or rather the Son's Person, and life and that reproduced in us. Still he refers to the other, but puts it all together, " His blood cleanseth from all sin "-we are on earth, but Christ is the propitiation for the whole world, as well as for Jewish believers. Man is not looked at in the flesh; it is not exactly, therefore, bearing sins, but then we are in this world as Christ is before God, so as to have boldness. It is, what He is we are; and, in this, love is perfected. It is all what suits God, though the cleansing blood be necessarily there. But we are in the light, as God is in the light. It is what divine love has done for us, and the place it has put us in.
Paul, though he be essentially the same, does not give us Peter's form of it, " He gave himself for our sins," " died for our sins according to the Scriptures "-Hebrews gives us both sides, but the first more in view of the general result; " to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself " and, in correspondency to death and judgment, " bore the sins of many." Paul, I think, brings it more from God's side-Peter more Christ's work " that we might live to God." In Paul, God sets Christ forth a propitiatory " that he might be just in justifying." " He gave himself for our sins." " God commends his love to us." He reasons more downward from grace, though both meet in the one act, and are substantially the same as to this. " He was delivered " in Paul " for our offenses," " God made him to be sin for us "-God is for us in it. In Peter, He dies and is raised in glory " that our faith and hope might be in God." The truth is the same, but in Peter it is more our need and judicial. Hence, too, we never get sin in Peter, only sins. You get " the God of all grace " as a title, and referred to our present walk, but you never get the love of God, or love as in -Him presented in Peter-what we know as the fruits of it are, but it is not presented as such. All this is not clearly put, but profoundly interesting.
-18. As to kip-per (the piel form of ka-phar to cover), and kip-per al (expiate for). Al (for) follows the natural sense of kip-per (expiate), as the Lexicons say, though other prepositions be occasionally used. But it seems to me that kip-per must be very much taken alone in the sense of reconciling or appeasing, and the al merely gives the object about which the kip-per takes place. We may have it as " reconcile," with no preposition, as Gen. 32:2020And say ye moreover, Behold, thy servant Jacob is behind us. For he said, I will appease him with the present that goeth before me, and afterward I will see his face; peradventure he will accept of me. (Genesis 32:20), " I will appease, reconcile his face," Dan. 9:2424Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. (Daniel 9:24) with a-von (iniquity), Lev. 6:3030And no sin offering, whereof any of the blood is brought into the tabernacle of the congregation to reconcile withal in the holy place, shall be eaten: it shall be burnt in the fire. (Leviticus 6:30). But we have kip-per al (expiate upon) the scape-goat. We have also Exodus 3o: to in English " atonement " upon it. Then Lev. 8:1515And he slew it; and Moses took the blood, and put it upon the horns of the altar round about with his finger, and purified the altar, and poured the blood at the bottom of the altar, and sanctified it, to make reconciliation upon it. (Leviticus 8:15) " sanctified, to make reconciliation upon it." In all al (for, etc.). Here the altar of burnt-offering. Now al must have different senses here-no atonement was made on the altar of incense; and it does not answer in the case of the scape-goat (in English " with "); with persons a/ is common. We have also Pkap-per al... min (to make expiation for) with al of the person, and mitt (from) of the sins. In Psa. 79:99Help us, O God of our salvation, for the glory of thy name: and deliver us, and purge away our sins, for thy name's sake. (Psalm 79:9), we have al with sins. In Lev. 16:1717And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement in the holy place, until he come out, and have made an atonement for himself, and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel. (Leviticus 16:17) we have b' (in) the holy place. If " in " be right absolutely the b'ad (about, or for) himself, his house, and all the congregation (a l'addresse de), not the object of the act, but as that which has its part in what is done, Ex. 8:2424And the Lord did so; and there came a grievous swarm of flies into the house of Pharaoh, and into his servants' houses, and into all the land of Egypt: the land was corrupted by reason of the swarm of flies. (Exodus 8:24); in verse 33, we find kip-per without a preposition for the places and things, and al for the priests and people of the congregation. The only real difficulty is the scape-goat, but I apprehend it comes under the general rule. As to the altar of incense-it is only " on it " so far as it was defiled by the sins of the people. It was the object of the ko-pher (atoning work) made; so in verse 33 the places were reconciled, but the expiation had to be made about the priests and people as the object-b'ad (in reference to) offers no difficulty.
In chapter 8: 15 I am disposed to take l'kap-per a-lay (to make expiation for it) as meaning " in making reconciliation for it "-He sanctified it in this, ko-pher (atoning) for it. It was the object of the ko-pher (atoning) here, as in Gen. 2:22And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. (Genesis 2:2). As to Lev. 16:1010But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the Lord, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness. (Leviticus 16:10)" to make an atonement with " gives substantially the sense, though " with " may be too precise. The instrumental " with " is b' as in Gen. 32:2121So went the present over before him: and himself lodged that night in the company. (Genesis 32:21); Ex. 29:3333And they shall eat those things wherewith the atonement was made, to consecrate and to sanctify them: but a stranger shall not eat thereof, because they are holy. (Exodus 29:33) Sam. 21:3-but the scape-goat is the object as to which the Pkap-per (to make atonement) takes place, is before the mind as where sin is in question, requiring the ko-pher. In the passages with b' (in), this has nothing particular to do with the word kip-per, it is the common use of it, but here the scape-goat presented the sin as needing l'kap-par (to be expiated), but those were the sins on the goat-the goat was as to itself identified in idea with the other, and on it the sins were carried into a land where none could find them, and so peace was made; so that " with " gives the general sense, though too precise. As having the sins laid upon him, atonement was made in respect of him, not of the goat, but what was on him, and the blood being shed, all the sins carried away into the land where they are no more found. All was cleared away and removed-Christ bore our sins on the cross, then atonement had to be made for the sins that were upon Him, and there it was made in the same act, in His dying. For Himself; clearly no propitiation was made-He was making it; still He was the scape-goat, as well as the Lord's lot, and the actual sins that were there had to be atoned for. What He stood as, and what He carried was the object of the propitiation He made. In Lev. 19:2222And the priest shall make an atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering before the Lord for his sin which he hath done: and the sin which he hath done shall be forgiven him. (Leviticus 19:22) we have al, both for the person, and for the sin.
(Dated 1874.) I turn to this great day of atonement a little more clearly, or rather precisely and definitely. The blood of the bullock and of the goat were sprinkled on and before (for I suppose this applies to the goat too) the mercyseat, and on the altar; so that as God was glorified by the blood, so access was given by it, " boldness to enter by the blood "-God glorified, and we able to draw nigh. But then the altar of incense (as I have supposed it) also sprinkled, i.e.,
communion, when not actually in heaven but only in heavenly places, according to what glorified God; and this is all we have of the blood on the great day of atonement. The bullock for Aaron and his sons-the fullest value of Christ as an offering -ours, though what was essential was done for Israel as regards God. Azazel was the actual putting-away of sins; then there was the burnt-offering, and fat of the sin-offering burned on the altar-the perfect value of Christ's sacrifice as a sweet savor to God, by which He is glorified in Christ's perfection in His sacrifice, " Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life that I may take it again." But the blood is here all within for God Himself; approach to Him and communion; see the difference of the sin-offerings even when the blood was brought into the holy (not most holy) place. The blood was sprinkled seven times before the veil-the place of approach in worship; then on the altar of incense, and then all the rest at the foot of the altar of burnt-offering, and, as to the people at any rate (nothing said as to the high priest) there was forgiveness. It was according to God, but it was not the foundation of all the rest; nor for God, the Lord's lot. Even the scape-goat was the removal of the sins, not exactly the forgiveness. In particular or individual sinoffering, it is evident-but in all there was restoration of communion, not foundation for it. Hence we have not forgiveness in chapter 16-cleansing we have, and sins put out of God's sight.
The more it is weighed, the more important does the great day of atonement become. It is not a burnt-offering to be accepted according to a sweet savor, nor a sin-offering to restore a soul by priestly intervention, or the people and priest in sprinkling before the veil and on the altar of incense, so that communion might be restored to them. It is in no sense application consequent on failure in responsibility. It was a sin-offering, and of course in respect of the priest and his house, and the people, but not application and restoration- God was in view. No doubt that the sins were carried into a land not inhabited, but it was not personal restoration nor access; as the blood on the mercy-seat, it laid the ground for it, though in another way. It was substitution, doing the work which bore the sins away out of God's sight. So in sprinkling the tabernacle, it was " because of the iniquities of the children of Israel among whom I dwell." The blood was brought in in respect of sin no doubt, but as meeting God's own nature. The sins were gone, but no blood was put on the brazen altar; it was not measured judicially by man's responsibility. The sins did not suit God's presence, and cleansing was effected on God's throne and before it, and on the altar of incense. We go into the holiest—the veil is now rent. Burnt-offerings were offered afterward, and the fat of the sin-offering, and the rest was burned outside the camp. A religion for the sanctuary is not a worldly religion—it goes outside the camp or earthly relationship with God. When the priests were consecrated, they belonged as such to what was within; hence the offerings were burned outside the camp; till after they were consecrated, they of course could not go in—not inside the brazen altar; they needed the judicial atonement. This was a special case; hence the blood was poured out at the brazen altar (for they were taken as sinners to be priests), and the body, etc., burned without the camp. In the case of the sin-offering for the anointed priest or congregation, the communion of all was interrupted, and the blood was sprinkled before the veil and on the altar of incense, for there it was needed to re-establish it, but the blood was put at the bottom of the altar of burnt-offering, for they were guilty—the bodies burned outside the camp, the blood having gone into the sanctuary. It was not God's nature met, but communion re-established with it, and judicially met withal at the altar of burnt-offering. Individual cases got their place back where communion subsisted. For Aaron himself there was no offering.
What makes the absence of a scape-bullock easily understood is, that it was for priests, persons already within as such. What concerned them was approach within, or rather God's nature or character within, for they would not have been there without it—it was done, in fact, when they were consecrated; but it gives strongly the true character of worship. In point of fact we were sinners just as Jews will be, or were, on the earth, and hence have needed the scape-goat, when our responsibility was in question as they do; just the same exactly as we anticipate the use of Isa. 53, or even the blessing of the new covenant, but it does show what our worship in the priestly character is (compare Deut. 16).
NOTE.—The new covenant does not go beyond forgiveness, and remembering sins no more. No doubt all depends, to the eternal blessing, in Christ having carried the blood once for all into God's presence, but the effect in the new covenant is only forgiveness, quod nota. How this shows too where the Evangelical Church is, though with their knowledge of sin they have not even this!