consecration (Lev. ix. 2); the sin-offering of the woman at her purification (xii. 6); and of the leper at his cleansing, xiv. 19. This, however, was their general character. Of the sin-offering for the whole congregation we have an account in Lev. iv. 13-21, where a young bullock being brought before the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, or during the temple, into the court of the priests, the elders or heads of the tribes, as representing the people, laid their hands upon its head, and it was killed according to the form mentioned for the burnt-offering. The blood was then taken by the priest into the holy place, where, having dipped his finger in it seven times, he sprinkled what adhered to it, seven times before the vail; after which he returned to the court of the priests, ascended the altar, put some of the blood upon the horns at its corners, and poured out the rest at its foot. The fat was the only part of the animal that was offered on the altar; for the rest, including the skin, inwards, and even the dung, were carried forth to a clean portion of that place, where the ashes of the altar were poured out, and burnt completely with fire. The sin-offering for individuals, only varied in some few trifling circumstances from this; except that the whole of the carcase, after the fat and inwards had been burned, belonged to the priest, Lev. vi. 24—29. (See further in the next paragraph.) We must not forget, while treating of sin-offerings, that our Saviour is often spoken of under that character, particularly in Rom. viii. 3; 2 Cor. v. 21; Heb. ix. 28. Indeed, in the epistle to the Hebrews these offerings are clearly applied as types of Christ; "For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood was brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, were burnt without the camp; wherefore, Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate," Heb. xii. 11, 12. *

3. Trespass-offerings were of two kinds; doubtful and undoubted. The former were offered in cases where their consciences surmised that they had committed a sin, while their understandings were in doubt; the latter kind, like most other piacular sacrifices, was appointed for the purgation of certain corporeal impurities, as well as for the expiation of trespasses, properly so called. The cases in which they were offered were five; viz. for things stolen, unjustly gotten, or detained; for sacrilege; for violating the chastity of a bondmaid; for a Nazarite; and for a leper, Lev. vi. 2-7; Numb. v. 5-8; Lev. v. 16; xix. 20-22; Numb. vi. 2-21; Lev.

* See Magee on the Atonement, vol. i. Illustrations, No. 27.

xiv. 12. In the case of the trespass-offering, as well as that of the sin-offering, the person who brought the sacrifice, placed his hands on the head of the animal, between the horns, and confessed his sin, saying, "I have sinned, I have done iniquity, I have trespassed, and done thus and thus, (specifying the sin of which he had been guilty) and do return by repentance before thee, and with this I make atonement." The animal was then considered as vicariously bearing the sins of the persons who presented it. The reader will recollect that our Lord is said (Isa. liii. 10) to have had his soul made "an offering for sin;" where the very same word is used as is put for the trespass-offering. It is difficult to define the difference between the two classes of sins for which the two last-mentioned offerings were presented; viz. sins and trespasses. But whatever this difference consisted in, there were several points of difference between the sacrifices respectively designated by these terms. The sex of the victims and the rites to be performed in the trespass-offerings, were altogether different from those prescribed for the sin-offerings. The former always consisted of rams and he-lambs, which were never used for the latter. The blood of the sin-offering was to be put on the horns of the altar (Lev. iv. 7, 18, 25, 30), and that of the trespass-offering was to be sprinkled on the sides of the altar, vii. 2. Sin-offerings, also, as we have seen, were offered for the whole congregation; but trespass-offerings were only required from individuals. These two kinds of sacrifices had this point of resemblance, that they were considered as legitimately offered, only in compliance with the express command of the law; neither of them was ever admitted as a votive or voluntary oblation: that was peculiar to peace-offerings and burnt sacrifices.

4. Peace-offerings comprehended thank-offerings-free-willofferings and offerings made in consequence of vows, Lev. vii. 12-16. The Hebrew word used for these, denotes, as Dr. Clarke remarks,* to complete, make whole, because by them that which was lacking was considered as being now made up; and that which was broken-the covenant of God by his creature's transgression-was supposed to be made whole. So that after such an offering, the sincere and conscientious mind had a right to consider that the breach was made up between God and it, and that it might lay confident hold on this covenant of peace. To this the Apostle evidently alludes, Eph. ii. 14-19, "He is our peace (i. e. our peace-offering) who has made both one, and broken down the

Comment on Ler, vii.

middle wall; having abolished in his flesh the enmity," &c. (See the whole passage). The common offerings in such cases were, either a he or she calf, a he or she lamb, or a goat (Lev. iii. 1, 6, 12), accompanied with the proper meat-offering. They were to be without blemish for vows and thank-offerings (xxii. 18-22), but a free-will offering might be either lacking or superfluous in its parts, ver. 22. Whichever kind of them was brought, the offerer laid his hand upon its head, as an acknowledgment of guilt: after which, it was killed before the tabernacle of the congregation; its blood was sprinkled on the altar round about: the fat, the kidneys, the caul, and the rump, if it was a lamb, were all burnt on the altar (iii. 1-5); the breast, after it was waved, and the shoulder, after it was heaved, became the property of the priests (vii. 31-34); and the rest of the victim was eaten by the offerer, under the restrictions laid down in Lev. vii. 19-21; xxii. 30; xix. 5-8. The peace-offering for the whole congregation was made only once a year-at the feast of Pentecost, when two lambs composed the sacrifice. The peace-offerings of individuals were of three kinds; viz. those which were offered without bread; those which were offered with bread; and the peace-offerings of the Nazarites, about which there were some peculiarities. See Numb. vi. 15–20; Lev. vii. 31, 32.

5. Among the eucharistic oblations may also be placed the firstlings and the tithes. After the preservation of the firstborn in Egypt, God declared that in memory of so singular a benefit, every first-born male, both of man and beast, should #thenceforward be devoted to him, Numb. iii. 13. Áll male =firstlings of beasts fit for the altar were to be sacrificed (Ex. xiii. 15; Numb. xviii. 17); and all male first-born children were to be redeemed by five shekels of money paid to the priests, Numb. iii. 47. This law is considered by the Jews as having no reference to the tribe of Levi, because all the males of that tribe were constantly devoted to the service of the sanctuary. The firstling of an ass was to be redeemed by the substitution of a lamb, or, that no one might derive. any benefit from the sacrilege, his neck was to be broken, Ex. xiii. 13. The flesh of every firstling brought to the altar was wholly allotted to the priests, Numb. xviii. 17, 18. But if any firstling happened to have a blemish, it was not to be brought to the altar as a sacrifice, but to be given to the priests; and it was allowed to be eaten any where, not only by the priests themselves, but also by any other persons, Deut. xv. 21, 2

To the same order of sacrifices must also be referred those

victims which were selected as the tithe of lambs, kids, and calves, Lev. xxvii. 32. The tenth of the herd and of the flock was every year to be devoted to the Lord, as a kind of thankoffering for all the advantages derived from cattle. It was to be solemnly offered to the Lord; if it happened to have any blemish, it might lawfully be eaten any where, but was not to be redeemed with money, nor to be exchanged for any other animal. But whatever was its condition, the whole of the flesh (according to Maimonides) belonged to the proprietor, and no part of it to the priests.

III. We have had occasion, in treating of the various kinds of sacrifices, to notice some of the purposes for which they were designed. It will not be amiss, however, to do so more formally in this place. The general design and uses of these sacrifices, then, were (1.) As an acknowledgment of receiving all their good things from the hand of God, and of his right in the whole of that of which they offered him a part; though to make this act the more significant and expressive, it was a part of almost every thing they had. — (2.) To be a means of repentance and humiliation for sin, of the desert of which they were reminded by the suffering and death of the victim, substituted in their room, and suffering in their stead. (3.) To typify that promised sacrifice of atonement which the son of God was to offer in due time, and to assist their faith in him.* Of the political use of many of these sacrifices we have spoken, in treating of the Judicial law.

SECTION II.

MEAT AND DRINK OFFERINGS.

I. MEAT OFFERINGS.

1. General directions for preparing them2. The omer of first fruits-3. The two loaves for the day of Pentecost-4. The shew-bread-5. Meat offerings for particular persons-6. The oblations of incense, and tithes of inanimate things—7. Rules prescribed for offering meat offerings. II. DRINK OFFERINGS. III. The obligations to present sacrifices and oblations, and the time when they became due. IV. The typical nature of the whole class of sacrifices.

I. We have already noticed four classes of offerings, and we now pass on to a fifth class, known by the appellation of meat offerings (mincha).

* See Lightfoot, Temple Service, ch. viii. sect. 1-4; Owen on the Hebrews, Exerc. xxiv; Jennings' Jewish Antiq. b. i. c. 5; Lamy's App. Bib. b. i. c. 73 Brown's Jewish Antiquities, vol. i. part iv. sect. 2; Outram on Sacrifices, Diss. i. ch. ix-xvii.

1. These offerings were composed of wheaten or barley flour; some with, and others without the addition of wine. They were all to be mixed with oil, and invariably to be connected with some kind of victims, except in the case of a person who had sinned being so poor, that he could not purchase two turtle doves, or two young pigeons for an offering. The victims which God required to be always accompanied with meat offerings, were all the burnt-offerings of the whole congregation, with all those of individuals, and the peaceofferings selected from the flock of the herd, but none taken from birds, except when they were substituted for a quadruped, nor any sin-offerings, except those offered by a purified leper, Numb. xv. 2, &c.; xxviii. 29; Lev. xiv. 10, 31. The following are the portions prescribed for the meat-offerings:for bullocks, three-tenths of an ephah of fine flour mingled with half a hin of oil; for rams, two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour, mingled with a third part of a hin of oil; and for goats and female sheep, as well as for lambs and kids, both male and female, only one-tenth of an ephah of fine fiour, mingled with the fourth part of a hin of oil, Numb. xv. These were the general directions, but in Lev. xxiii. 10—13, we find the lamb which was offered on the same day as the sheaf of the first-fruits, was to be accompanied with two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour; and in ch. xiv. 10, we find a log ordered for three-tenth deals in the meat-offering of the leper; and in ver. 21, a log of oil is ordered to but one-tenth deal of fine flour, in the case of those lepers who were poor.

The meat-offerings unaccompanied with any libations of wine, were either for the whole congregation of Israel, or for particular persons. Those of the former kind were three: the omer, or sheaf of first-fruits waved before the Lord; the two loaves ordered on the day of Pentecost; and the loaves called the shew bread.

2. The omer of first-fruits was offered on the sixteenth day of the month Nisan, before the wheat had grown to a full ear, and before which it was not lawful for any person to taste the new corn. Before the offering up of the first-fruits, all was unclean; after this oblation, all was holy. To this St. Paul alludes in Rom. xi. 16" If the first-fruit be holy, the lump is also holy."* These first-fruits were considered as giving a public and joyful assurance that the general harvest would soon be gathered in. How beautiful and striking is St. Paul's allusion to the ceremony of presenting this oblation, in the first epistle to the Corinthians, in which place he argues and

* Lamy, App. Bib. b. i. c. 7.