Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

was not a Sacrifice: Every Offering was not a Sacrifice. Nothing was a Sacrifice, but what was brought and offered immediate to God, and confumed in part or whole. But when any thing was given to God, and was kept entire, or if it was confumed upon the Altar, yet was not given immediate to God, but was defigned to ferve fome other Use (e. g. the Wood which was placed upon the Altar in order to confume the Flesh, or the Meat and Drink Offering) · This was not a Sacrifice, tho' perhaps a Gift to the Altar ; and it is poflible in given cafes it might be called Corban, or a Therumah. And hence it was, as Dr. Outram has well obferved, *That neither the Levites, nor the

[ocr errors]

Veffels for Sacred Ufes, tho' they were "offered unto God, are wont to be "reckoned Sacrifices. And the fame is "to be faid of the Scape Goat, which being offered to God before the Altar,

[ocr errors]

* Quo factum eft, ut nec Levitæ, neque Minifterii facri vafa, etiamfi Deo offerrentur, Sacrificiis accenferi folent. Quod idem quoque Statuendum de Hirco ifto qui Deo ante aram oblatus, in deferta vivus abducebatur. Outram de Sacrificiis, p 82.

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

was carried

away alive into the Wilder "nefs." He then goes on to define Sacrifices very rightly,- "Such things as 66 were offered to God fo as to be ritè confumenda, to be confumed in the "folemn manner appointed."

The ufual diftinction of Sacrifices is into Bloody and Unbloody. The Former of these are called Zebachim, the Latter Minchoth. But this Diftinction is not fo conftant as never to admit of Exception. For Cain and Abel's Sacrifices, tho' one was Bloody, and the Other Unbloody, were Both called by the word, Mincha. And it is certain that Mincha is a general word for a Prefent, Gen. xxxii. 13. Later Ufe has pretty much confined this word to Oblations of Flower, or Meal; and in this it differ'd from the Zebachim, which implied fuch Oblations as were fain. Abarbinel tells us, that the "word

[ocr errors][merged small]

*Verbum Zebach et Verbum Corban non funt Synonoma, ut femper idem Significent. Omne Zebach eft Corban, at vero non convertitur ut omne Corban fit Zebach. Nam Zebach dicitur de Vivis immolatis et quæ tum adolebantur in Ara. Nam Immolatio feu Zebicha eft jugulatio. Abarb. Exord. Comment. in Levit. c. i.

[blocks in formation]

Synonomous, fo as that you might use "the one or the other for the fame thing. "Every Zebach was a Corban; but the

[ocr errors]

reverse was not true, that every Corban << was a Zebach. For the Term Zebach, was applied only to fuch living things, as had their Throats cut, and were "offered upon the Altar." For the Truth of this Obfervation he cites Deut. xii. 21. And then he goes on to obferve, «* Every "Zebach was a Corban, a Gift offered upon the Altar But there is a Corban [i. e. a Gift] which is not a Zebach, e. g. The Corban of a Bird, because in that cafe there is no cutting the "Throat; and likewife the Mincha [or "Meat Offering] was called a Corban." According therefore to Him the word Zebach relates only to the Gifts or Oblations of Bullocks, Sheep, and Goats, in their respective Species; and does not take in Birds. But whether the word Zabach, which fignifies to flay, be only to be ap

*Omne Zebach eft Corban, quod adolebatur in ara. Verum eft Corban quod non eft Zebach, e. g. Oblatio Volucris, quoniam in eâ non eft jugulatio ; et Mincha etiam vocatur Corban. Abarb. Exor. Comment, in Levit. c. i.

plied to all other Animals, and not to Birds, is not very material. The taking away the Life of a Bird in order to facrifice it, was deem'd among the Jews a great piece of Art, and Nicety: but as Birds were confumed upon the Altar, as well as other Animals, they properly were Sacrifices, and were included in the general words, Corban, or Mattenoth, which comprehended all and every Oblation to God.

‹up

Thus much may be neceffary to clear the Idea annexed to the word, Sacrifice; and to fhew what That was. It was a Gift, or Oblation, folemnly made to God, and in part, or in whole, confumed. From the word We may now -pass a Step further, and obferve,

Secondly, That Sacrifices offered without Moral Virtues were always looked upon by God as of no worth, or value: But when they were accompanied with an upright heart, and there was a Mind rightly difpofed towards God in him that brought his Sacrifices, Then they were fuch as God efteemed; fuch as He commanded, required, and expected. This is C 2

fo plain from many paffages in the Scripture, particularly in the Prophets, that no one can doubt of its 'Truth. Vide Efaiah i. 11-18. — lxvi. 3. Jeremiah vi. 20. Amos vi. 20. Hofeab vi. 6. And how the Beft and Wifeft Heathens looked upon this matter, one may judge from Plato, who fays "It would be a ter"rible thing indeed, if the Gods were

cr

[ocr errors]

to have regard to our Gifts and Sacri"fices, and not to the Mind, whether a "Man be holy and righteous or not."

Thirdly, As Obedience to Moral Duties, and Rectitude of Mind was always the primary thing required by God, so it is obfervable that in Offering Sacrifices fuch Rites and Ceremonies always attended them as implied or manifested the Moral Difpofition of the Mind.

It is needlefs at large to prove the former part of this propofition: it is fufficient to cite, Prov. xxi. 3. To do Judgment and

αν

* Καὶ γὰρ ἂν δεινὸν ἔτη ἔι πρὸς τὰ δῶρα και τας θυσίας ἀποβλέπεσιν ἡμῶν οι θεοί, ἀλλὰ μὴ πρὸς τὴν ψυχὴν, αν τις ὅσιος το δίκαιος ὧν τυγχάνῃ. Plat. Alcib. 2.

Juftice

« FöregåendeFortsätt »