The Christadelphian November 1907, W.H. Boulton

“The Day of Atonement”

Of all the rites and ceremonies of the Jewish ritual, those connected with the Day of Atonement are, perhaps, the most impressive. Even in these days, so far removed from the age of Moses, the Day of Atonement is still the day of days to a Jew. Although some may be so unorthodox as to ignore all other manifestations of the Jewish religion, on this day Jewish descent usually asserts itself, and few indeed will let it pass without some recognition.

A day that has so impressed itself on the minds of a whole race for so many centuries, and under such varied circumstances of captivity and dispersion, must surely contain something in its rites and symbols of great import to Israel—using that name in its highest import for “Israelites indeed,” “the Israel of God.”

Its position in the calendar is in itself suggestive. It came in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month. That seventh month was marked out from all others by a special introduction, as well as by the occurrence therein of the Day of Atonement and the feast of tabernacles. It will be remembered that in the Jewish ceremonial, sacrifices were ordained for the opening of every month. On those occasions Israel was commanded to offer up as a burnt offering unto the Lord, two young bullocks, one ram, seven lambs of the first year, together with one kid for a sin offering, each being accompanied by the appointed flour for meat (or meal) offerings (Num. 28:11 to 15). All these were in addition to the continual (daily) offerings. But on the opening of this seventh month other sacrifices were to be offered in addition to these. “In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, ye shall have an holy convocation; ye shall do no servile work: it is a day of blowing the trumpet unto you. And ye shall offer a burnt offering for a sweet savour unto the Lord; one young bullock, one ram, and seven lambs of the first year without blemish, . . . and one kid of the goats for a sin offering, to make an atonement for you (Num 29:1 to 6). Thus Israel would be prepared for the solemn ceremonial that was to follow, and the seventh month would be marked out as a special month dedicated to the Lord, culminating in the feast of tabernacles which followed the day of atonement. The typical significance of the feast of tabernacles as a prefiguring of the millennium, the seventh thousand years, is apparent, and the occurrence of the fast and feast almost consecutively would serve to remind Israel that atonement was a necessary preliminary to the rejoicing of the feast. It is also an indication to us of the necessity of atonement for all who desire to participate in the glories of the millennial age.

It was after announcing the arrangements that were to usher in this special month that Moses proceeded to lay down instructions for the day of atonement. “And ye shall have on the tenth day of this seventh month an holy convocation; and ye shall afflict your souls: ye shall not do any work therein: But ye shall offer a burnt offering unto the Lord for a sweet savour; one young bullock, one ram, and seven lambs of the first year; they shall be unto you without blemish . . . one kid of the goats for a sin offering, beside the sin offering of atonement, and the continual burnt offering” (Num. 29:7–11). The day is also mentioned, with further details for observance, in Lev. 23. There we read, “On the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be a day of atonement: it shall be a holy convocation unto you; and ye shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord. And ye shall do no work in that same day: for it is a day of atonement, to make an atonement for you before the Lord your God. For whatsoever soul it be that shall not be afflicted in that same day, he shall be cut off from among his people. And whatsoever soul it be that doeth any work in that same day, the same soul will I destroy from among his people. Ye shall do no manner of work: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations in all your dwellings. It shall be a sabbath of rest, and ye shall afflict your souls” (Lev. 23:27–32).

The imperative character of these commands directs our attention to them, in order that we may see what we, in these far-removed days, can glean from them. First, then, it ensured, so long as the commands were heeded, an annual day of humiliation. This was a most valuable provision in the national life of Israel. They, like all other nations, were flesh, and the flesh is naturally proud, boastful, and heedless of God. Here was a provision to check this innate tendency of human nature to self-assertiveness, a provision so strict that non-observance meant cutting off, or destruction, to the individual. Good would it be if such a recognition of God could be enforced in these days of free thought, new theology, and what not, when men seem almost to have forgotten God, and think mainly of their own power and achievements. Its value to Israel was enhanced by the impressiveness of the command, and by the character of the ordinances that were to be carried out. The prevailing lesson which it must have left upon minds rightly exercised by it was that flesh must not boast, that man is but a sinner, and that God is supreme. One thing more it taught, unpalatable though the lesson be to our contemporaries, that God is to be approached only by the means which He has arranged and provided. God’s majesty is obscured by popular teaching, which suggests that any individual can approach God just how and when he or she likes, and in any state or condition of unpreparedness. The ceremonial associated with the day of atonement gives a death-blow to any such loose ideas of the majesty of the Lord of heaven and earth.

The ceremonies of that day are set out in detail in yet another chapter of the books of Moses (Lev. 16.—see verses 29 to 34). The occasion of the pronouncement was the death of Nadab and Abihu for offering strange fire unto the Lord (verse 1). This is a suggestive fact. It is only sin that necessitates atonement, and in this case a particular sin leads to the record of the procedure which should obtain that atonement for Israel year by year.

The first thing that strikes the reader in examining the chapter is the primary importance of sacrifice. Unbidden approach before the mercy seat meant death, and what is more, that approach must always be accompanied by the blood of the sacrifice. “Thus shall Aaron come unto the holy place: with a young bullock for a sin offering, and a ram for a burnt offering” (verse 3). The application to the anti-typical of the case is evident. “He (Jesus, the high priest of our profession) put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (Heb. 9:26), for “without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin.” But not only was sacrifice an essential of the case, it was also necessary that the high priest should be suitably attired. The garments provided “for glory and for beauty,” with their varied colours and the breastplate, were not to be put on in carrying out the earlier ceremonies that marked the day. “He shall put on the holy linen coat, and he shall have the linen breeches upon his flesh, and shall be girded with a linen girdle, and with the linen mitre shall he be attired” (verse 4). There can be no mistaking the truth intended to be set forth in this shadowy representation of divine teaching. The instructions for the manufacture of these garments indicate that they were to be of fine linen (Exod. 28:39), and that is distinctly stated to be representative of righteousness (Rev. 19:8). The Hebrew word signifies to be bleached, an appropriate idea, for it suggests the removal of all imperfections of colour, and naturally reminds one of the garment unspotted by the flesh. It self-evidently teaches that the antitype of the Aaronic high priest was to be “holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners.” The concluding words of the verse we are now considering show that this was not all that was necessary. To that which represented righteousness there was to be added a purification of the flesh. “Therefore shall he wash his flesh in water, and so put them on.” The obvious bearing of this instruction is that the flesh is unclean. “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one” (Job. 14:4). Hence there was the need for washing or purification.

Now, although it would probably have appeared to human ideas that a high priest so attired and washed was fully qualified to enter upon all the duties that fell to him on the day of atonement, such was not the case. He had in type his righteousness; he had, also in type, passed through a ceremony which was connected with “fulfilling all righteousness,” but he had still to offer sacrifice for himself. “Thus shall Aaron come into the holy place: with a young bullock for a sin offering, and a ram for a burnt offering. And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin offering, which is for himself, and make an atonement for himself and for his house” (verses 3, 6). The method adopted is set out as follows: “And Aaron shall offer the bullock of the sin offering, which is for himself, and shall make an atonement for himself, and for his house, and shall kill the bullock of the sin offering which is for himself: and he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from off the altar before the Lord, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within the veil: and he shall put the incense upon the fire before the Lord, that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy seat that is upon the testimony, that he die not: and he shall 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” (verses 11–14). Sacrifice and prayer for himself is clearly the meaning of the ceremony. What of the antitype? What of him who is our merciful and faithful high priest? The record is clear. “Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with the blood of others; for then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (Heb. 9:25, 26). “For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God” (Rom. 6:10). “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” (Heb. 7:27). Orthodoxy has no place for such passages of the divine word. So much the worse for orthodoxy! So much the worse, too, for any “ism” that fails to give due weight to all the counsel of God touching the things concerning the name of Jesus Christ. Reduced to its elements the truth is exceedingly simple. Flesh is unclean, hence the antitypical High Priest who partook of flesh and blood, offered for himself as well as for the people, and hence it is that whilst it is recorded of him that although tempted in all points like as we are he was yet without sin, it is also recorded that “neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption (Heb. 9:12).

This part of the high priest’s duties on the day of atonement being accomplished, he could proceed to the next. “And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats for a sin offering, and one ram for a burnt offering. And he shall take the two goats and present them before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat. And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the Lord’s lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering. But 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” (verses 5, 7–10). This introduces a new feature, for whilst the sin offering for the priest consisted of one bullock, which was slain, that for the people consisted of two goats, one of which was slain and the other turned into the wilderness. Concerning the one to be slain we read, “Then shall he kill the goat of the sin offering, that is for the people, and bring his blood within the veil, and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the mercy seat, and before the mercy seat: And he shall make an atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins” (verses 15, 16). The application in the antitype to him “in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins,” is too obvious to need comment. It is through his stripes that we are healed. Whilst we were yet sinners Christ died for the ungodly. He laid down his life for the sheep. These and numerous passages which readily occur to the mind, illustrate the truth thus adumbrated by the second sacrifice on the day of atonement.

But what of the scapegoat, the azazel as it is in the original? The word is compound of az, goat, and azel, to go away, to disappear. Aaron was commanded to “lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness; and the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities into a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness” (verses 21, 22). This is a sufficient explanation of the name azazel. Sins were in figure laid upon the goat, and by the goat’s escape to the wilderness were made to go away and disappear. The application to Israel after the spirit is seen in such passages as “As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us” (Psa. 103:12). “Thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back” (Isa. 38:17).

The question may well be asked here, Why is there an azazel for the people, but none for the priest, although a sin offering had to be provided for both? The contrast is significant, and the teaching of the enigma surely apparent. Whilst both people and priest in the antitype are, or were, of human nature, and thereby partook of sin’s flesh, yet he, the high priest, though tempted did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth. Hence there were no sins of his, needing to be borne away into the wilderness. He did always those things which pleased his Father. Thus once again there is a beautiful analogy between type and antitype.

And now the high priest’s duties were nearly completed. He put aside the linen garments, once more washed with water, and arrayed himself in the gorgeous official robes which were provided, the full regalia if we may so put it, “for glory and for beauty.” Thus apparelled he wore white, blue, purple, and scarlet. Suggestive colours! The white of righteousness, the cleansing blue, royal purple, and the scarlet as a reminder of the sin for which he atoned, overlaid by the breastplate in which were the stones representing the tribes of Israel, whilst upon his head was the golden plate inscribed “Holiness unto the Lord.”

Truly a beautiful and interesting type. Now

A great High Priest is come,

Who stands in Aaron’s place,

and in him who is full of grace and truth we discern all the antitypical principles foreshadowed in the Aaronic clothing. Righteousness—for never was there a man righteous like him; Cleansing—for in him alone can we be clean from sin’s defilement; Royalty—for he is the Lion of the tribe of Judah, soon to take his seat upon the throne of his father David, then to be fully recognised as the throne of the Lord over Israel; The crimson of sin can only be removed by him who once bore its nature, whilst as regards the breastplate,

The names of all the saints he bears

Engraven on his heart.

As for holiness unto the Lord—he is God’s Holy One, the perfection of holiness. It is he who, as the high priest of old, now awaits to carry out the final antitypical process which was in shadow carried out on the day of atonement. Clothed with his beautiful garments the high priest offered the burnt offerings of the rams, his own and the people’s (verse 24). What did this represent? Let us look at the law of the burnt offering. “It is the burnt offering, because of the burning upon the altar all night unto the morning, and the fire of the altar shall be burning in it. And the priest shall take up the ashes which the fire hath consumed with the burnt offering on the altar” (Lev. 6:9, 10). It involved complete consumption of all that was the subject of it. On the day of atonement the same method was adopted with regard to the animals used for the sin offering. “And the bullock for the sin offering, and the goat for the sin offering, whose blood was brought in to make atonement in the holy place, shall one carry forth without the camp; and they shall burn in the fire their skins, and their flesh, and their dung” (verse 27). It is evidently a typical representation of the consumption of sin’s flesh when mortality is swallowed up of life. It is the consummation of the process associated with atonement. Our great High Priest has already shown in himself what it means. Having died unto sin once, he liveth unto God. He is alive for evermore. No more encompassed with the weaknes inherent in human nature, but immortal, incorruptible, with eternal vigour and perennial youth. And such will be the saints, whose names he now bears, for in the day of their immortalisation they will be like him (1 John 3:2), partakers of the divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4).

Thus in the shadows of the old Mosaic ritual we see a beautiful outline of the wondrous scheme of salvation which centres in Christ Jesus. Such things as these are weighty indications of the divine origin of the Mosaic legislation, and when type and plain testimony concur in their teaching, we have a sure rock on which to trust in building up our beliefs concerning him whose work has made atonement possible for us.

W. H. Boulton