The Christadelphian November 1952, as published by John Carter

“A Covering For Sin”

C. J. Bruce

The word which in the Old Testament is translated atonement is kaphar and means primarily to cover or to conceal. “The day of atonement” occurring frequently in our version is literally “the day of the coverings”. Coverings were effected by sprinkling the blood of the offerings upon the altar and other articles of tabernacle furniture, but the divine testimony assures us that those coverings were ineffectual to bring about that which is correctly understood by the word atonement. “It was not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins”, and Scriptural oneness cannot exist between God and an unpardoned sinner. Where we read “He shall make an atonement” or “to make an atonement”, we ought to read, “He shall make a covering” or “to make a covering”. The propriety of substituting “covering” for atonement is seen in connection with the mercy seat. The word rendered “mercy seat” is the feminine substantive of kaphar , and means a covering, which it actually was, being placed as a lid upon the ark of the testimony ( Exod. 25 : 21 ).

It is highly significant, in connection with the present inquiry, that this covering was itself “covered” with blood. Aaron was commanded to “take of the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it with his finger upon the mercy seat eastward; and before the mercy seat shall he sprinkle of the blood with his finger seven times” ( Lev. 16 : 25–26 ). Of course the anti-typical mercy seat was “covered” when Christ shed his blood upon the cross. The significance is manifest in the fact that Christ was the antitype of the mercy seat as well as of the other articles of the tabernacle service. Paul declared that Christ has been “set forth a mercy seat (propitiation, A.V.) through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God” ( Rom. 3 : 25 ). The meaning is that as the mercy seat within the vail was “covered” with blood, so also Christ, the antitypical mercy seat, was “covered” with his own blood—an intimation that Christ’s redemptive work affected himself.

It is self-evident that only that which is unclean requires a covering, God being the Judge of what is clean or unclean. The clean and pure are pleasant in His eyes, and need not to be put out of sight. The Mosaic law regarded as ceremonially unclean the furniture of the tabernacle, and this, as in the case of the mercy seat, shadowed forth an uncleanness in the one whom the furniture represented; in addition to this there was also the uncleanness of the children of Israel “because of their transgressions in all their sins”. For both forms of uncleanness a “covering” was provided in the blood of the animals slain, and in the application of this to the antitype the matter resolves itself into an inquiry as to what is “covered” by the covering provided in Christ.

Dealing with the matter first in its reference to Christ, it is clear from what is testified concerning the mercy seat that Christ was affected by his own offering. It is further intimated in what is written about the offering of the High Priest, who made a “covering” for himself and his house first, and afterward for the people. In Hebrews this is directly connected with Christ “who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s; for this he did once, when he offered up himself” ( 7 : 27 ). Without pressing the analogy too closely , or attempting to change the “shadow” into “the very image”, it must be evident that in the antitype Christ must in some sense accomplish for himself what he accomplished for others. Of course, if under the law the high priest were morally affected by his offering, and because of his faith manifested by his obedience to the works of the law, received the remission of sins, it is certain that in this respect at least an important difference existed between type and antitype, for Christ’s moral character needed no covering, being “altogether lovely ”. With it Jehovah was well pleased. The import of the type is seen in a consideration of Christ’s nature or substance, which was such as to require a covering. Being made of the same physical substance as all Adam’s descendants, his nature was unclean in the sense of being corruptible, and furthermore it subjected Christ to those inclinations sinward that have been associated with human nature since Adam fell. The covering Christ required was one that would cover the defiled nature. There ought to be no question as to when this was accomplished, and it must be evident that it did not take place until he was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by a resurrection from the dead. It was not even accomplished when he emerged from the tomb, because at that time the corruptible had not put on incorruption, nor the mortal immortality. He was justified in (or by) the spirit some time between his emergence from the grave and his meeting of the same day with his disciples. He thereby became the forerunner of those who groan in this tabernacle, not for that they might be unclothed but clothed upon that mortality might be swallowed up of life. This is the covering to which the blood-sprinkled mercy seat pointed forward. The blood being shed in the crowning act of his obedience it is used as a symbol of the perfect righteousness developed, and it was because of that righteousness that his mortal nature was “covered” in the putting on of immortality. This fact is referred to in the Scriptures in both simple and figurative language, of which the following are instances:

“The God of peace that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect” ( Heb. 13 : 20 ). “Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows” ( Heb. 1 : 9 ). He “became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name” ( Phil. 2 : 9 ).

Applying ourselves to an inquiry concerning the “covering” Christ’s blood has provided for us, the Scriptural answer is that when we became acquainted with the way of salvation we were defiled both in nature and conscience. The conscience was defiled by our own wicked works. Nothing else could defile it. The “covering” in its first operation purges us “from our old sins” ( 2 Pet. 1 : 9 ). Our hearts have been “sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water” ( Heb. 10 : 13 ). The old man as to mind and practices is accounted dead and buried, while in his stead has arisen a new man created in the righteousness and holiness of the truth. The nature is of course unchanged, and therefore “uncovered”. It is still a nature from which the curse is unremoved. Its native impulses towards sin while still existent are restrained, and every thought is being brought into captivity to Christ. Because of our obedient faith God deals with us not “after our sins, nor rewards us according to our iniquities”, but “as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us” ( Psa. 103 ). We are in that happy state described by the Psalmist: “Blessed is the man whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile” ( 32 : 1–2 ). Since the redemption that is in Christ is first moral, and afterward corporeal, the forgiven saint is spoken of as being redeemed.

If then Christ’s offering was his perfect obedience, in what way did he by reason of that obedience become a sin covering for such as should believe on him? The answer is that he became a sin-coverer by reason of his obedience constituting the basis upon which God should cover or remit our sins. The underlying principle operative is disclosed in a scriptural consideration of the obstacle in the way of our admission to God’s favour. This obstacle was due to the necessity (if moral harmony would prevail) of upholding God’s supremacy in His requirements upon us, to which requirements we, considered by ourselves as sinners, were unable to conform. The solution is found in the work of God through Christ, by which sin was condemned in the flesh, and God’s righteousness proclaimed for our acknowledgment, in order that we might submit to Him as just and the justifier of those believing in Jesus; or as it has been comprehensively stated by bro. Roberts, the way which has been adopted in reconciliation has been “to enforce the law against sin, and the same time leave the door open for repentant and obedient sinners”. Our belief in Jesus, which is our acknowledgment of God’s declared righteousness, as well as of our confidence in His promises, is counted to us for the remission of sins. That is to say, being possessed of a childlike disposition in respect to God’s works, and acknowledging His righteousness in the terms upon which His favour is obtained, as well as rejoicing in the mercy that has made our acceptance possible, we are permitted to enter into His grace.

A Profound yet simple subject has been twisted and obscured by grotesque expressions, absurd inferences and unscriptural assumptions. We find ourselves the creatures of vanity, out of harmony with God by reason of unrighteousness, but having in the gospel of our salvation a promise that repentance due to acceptance of God’s truth, and manifested in obedience, secures the remission of sins, and that a continuance in well doing will bring glory, honour and incorruptibility at the return of Christ.

J. C. Bruce.

(The above is published by request. It was written more than fifty years ago to deal with the speculations that agitated the minds of brethren after J. J. Andrew had put forward his theories on Adamic condemnation. The article strikes the right balance; it recognizes our inheritance of death as a divine punishment for sin, and also, getting behind the ritual to that represented by the ritual, the moral basis established by the offering of Jesus upon which God forgives our sins and gives us life, and indeed upon which the Lord himself was glorified.— Ed. )