Obrazy na stronie

xou as applied in the above passage by Whithy in his Paraphrase. On the subject of this Number at large, see also Numbers IV. XXII. and Balguy's Essay on Redemption,






Page 29. (a)—What efforts are made to get rid of those parts of Scripture, that lend support to the received doctrine of the Sacrifice of Christ, is evident from the remark made on this passage, by the ingenious author of Ben Mordecai's

Apology. “The allusion here,” he says, to be made to the 53d chapter of Isaiah, but the Lamb is not there considered as a Lamb to be sacrificed, but as a Lamb to be sheared.(Let. 7. p. 794. 2d Ed. 8vo.)--Now, upon what principle this author is enabled to pronounce, that the allusion in this place, is made to the Lamb spoken of in Isaiah, rather than to the Paschal Lamb, or to the Lamb, which under the Jewish Law was offered daily for the sins of the people, it is difficult to discover. His only reason seems to be, that in admitting the reference to either of the two last, the notion of sacrifice is necessarily involved; and the grand object in maintaining the resemblance to a Lamb that was to be sheared, not slain, was to keep the death of Christ out of view as much as possible.

But of the manner, in which Scripture is here used to support a particular hypothesis, we shall be better able to form a right judgment, when it shall have appeared, that the reference in John is not made to Isaiah; and also, that the Lamb in Isaiah is considered as a Lamb to be slain.

The latter is evident, not only from the entire context, but from the very words of the prophet, which describe the person spoken of (liii. 7.) to be “ brought as a Lamb to the slaughter;" so that one cannot but wonder at the pains taken to force the application to this passage of Isaiah, and still more at the peremptory assertion that the Lamb here spoken of, was a Lamb to be sheared only. It is true indeed, there is subjoined, and as a sheep before her SHEARERS is dumb: but if Mr. Wakefield's remarks on Acts viïi. 32, in which he contends that the word translated shearer should have been rendered slayer, be a just one, the objection vanishes at once. Retaining, however, the clause as it stands in the present version, that which follows,-so he openeth not his mouth,-clearly explains, that the character intended to be conveyed by the Prophet, in the whole of this figurative representation, was that of a meek

and uncomplaining resignation to suffering and death.

And this also shews us, that the passage in Isaiah, could not have been the one immediately referred to by John; because in it the Lamb is introduced but incidentally, and as furnishing the only adequate resemblance to that character, which was the primary object of the Prophet's contemplation: whereas, in the Baptist's declaration, that Jesus was the Lamb of God that taketh

away the sins of the world, the reference must naturally be to a Lamb before described, and understood, as possessed of some similar or corresponding virtue, such as St. Peter alludes to when he says, (1 Peter i. 18, 19.) Ye were REDEEMED---with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish. In this an allusion is evidently made to a Lamb, whose blood, under the Jewish Law bore analogy to that of Christ: that is, either to the Paschal Lamb, by the sprinkling of whose blood the Israelites had been delivered from destruction; or to the Lamb, that was daily sacrificed for the sins of the people, and which was bought with that half shekel, which all the Jews yearly paid, εις λυτρον της ψυχης αυτων, εξιλασασθαι περι των ψυχων αυτων, as the price of redemption of their Lives, to make an atonement for them. (Exod. xxx. 12. 14. 16.) With a view to this last, it is, that St. Peter most probably uses the expressions, Ye were not redeemed with Silver and Gold but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb, &c. i. e. it is not by a Lamb purchased with Silver and Gold that you have been redeemed, but by Christ, that truly spotless Lamb, which the former was intended to prefigure; who, by shedding his blood, has effectually redeemed you from the consequences of your sins; or, as the Baptist had before described him, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world; and, as St. John, who records these expressions of the Baptist, again speaks of him in the Apocalypse, (v. 9.) the Lamb which had been SLAIN, and by its Blood REDEEMED men out of every kindred and tongue and people and nation, or in other words, that had taken away the sins of the world.

The author indeed admits, (what it was impossible for him to deny,) that in the Apocalypse, Christ“ is spoken of as a Lamb that was slain :" but then he says, that " he is not spoken of as a vicarious sacrifice, for the Jews had no sacrifices of that nature." (Vol. ii. p. 789.) Be it so for the present: it is clear however, that the Lamb, to which the allusion is made in the figurative representations of Christ in the New Testament, is a Lamb that was slain and sacrificed; and that nothing, but the prejudices arising from a favourite hypothesis, could have led this writer to contend against a truth so notorious, and upon grounds so frivolous.



PAGE 29. (6)-The word naruos, translated propitiation, occurs in the New Testament, but in the two passages noticed in the page here referred to; viz. 1 John ii. 2. and iv. 10. Its true force, however, is obvious; since, as appears from the application of the words ιλασμος, ιλασκομαι, εξιλασκομαι, by the Seventy in the Old Testament, it corresponds to the Hebrew word 95, and therefore implies, the making atonement, and thereby effecting a reconciliation with, or propitiating the Deity.—The Greek translation of Ezekiel (xliv. 29.) has made it synonimous with on, a sin offering : and thus, H. Taylor (B. Mord. p. 808.) asserts, the word should be here translated.

But it is curious to remark, that this writer has been so far led away by a desire to maintain the system which he has adopted, that in two pages after, he goes on to shew, that no one circumstance belonging to the sin-offering, is to be found in the sacrifice of Christ. As producing indeed “ the effect of the sin-offerings, remission of sins,” he concludes it may be so called, though possessing no one ingredient that enters into the composition of a sin-offering. His radical error on the scripture use of the word re

« PoprzedniaDalej »