구약의 우상숭배와 제사제도 각종 dictionary 모음

SACRIFICE AND OFFERING Physical elements the worshiper brings to the Deity to express devotion, thanksgiving, or the need for forgiveness.

Ancient Near East Israel was not unique among the nations of the ancient Near East in their use of sacrifices and offerings as a means of religious expression. Some type of sacrificial system characterized the many religious methodologies that the nations employed in their attempts to honor their gods. The presence of sacrifices and offerings in Israel, therefore, was not unique to Israel.
Many references to the offering of sacrifices exist in extrabiblical literature. The primary approach to the gods was through the sacrificial system. In Babylon part of the ritual of purifying the temple of Bel for the New Year festival involved the slaughter of a ram. The animal was decapitated and the priest, in turn, used the body in the purification ceremony. The ram’s body then was thrown into the river. The ritual accompanying the replacing of the head of the kettledrum that was used in the temple required that a black bull be selected for sacrifice. After an elaborate ceremony that culminated in the sacrifice of the bull, its hide was dipped in and rubbed with two separate mixtures and then used to cover the kettledrum.
While the above sacrifices were performed on special occasions, a variety of rams, bulls, and birds were offered as meals to the idols on a daily basis. Barley beer, mixed beer, milk, and wine also were placed before the deities, as well as loaves of bread.
The sacrifices and offerings were designed to serve the gods by meeting any physical need that they might have had. The sacrifices were the food and drink of the gods. Faithfulness to the preparation and presentation of them was an act of devotion.

Old Testament From the earliest times of the OT, sacrifice was practiced. Cain and Abel brought offerings to the Lord from the produce of the land and from the first born of the flock (Gen. 4). Upon disembarking from the ark after the great flood, Noah immediately built an altar and offered burnt sacrifices. These were a soothing aroma to the Lord (Gen. 8). Other ancient Near Eastern flood stories have parallels to this act by Noah. The patriarchal stories in Gen. 12–50 are filled with instances of sacrifice to God. The most famous is that of Abraham and Isaac (Gen. 22).
An organized system of sacrifice does not appear in the OT until after the exodus of Israel from Egypt. In the instructions given for the building of the tabernacle and the establishment of a priestly organization, sacrifices were to be used in the consecration or ordination of the priests (Exod. 29). A bull was slaughtered as a sin offering. Other sacrifices provided Aaron and his sons a holy meal. These sacrifices were repeated each day for a week as a part of the “ordination” of the priests. The altar itself was consecrated through the offering of two lambs and a grain offering and a libation or “drink offering” (a misnomer, since it was never drunk but poured) of wine. This sacrifice also was carried out each day for a week.

The sacrifices that constituted much of the worship of Israel at this time were burned on an altar that was made from acacia wood and overlaid with copper (Exod. 27). In addition to the sacrifices offered on this altar, incense was burned on a smaller altar (Exod. 30). While the sacrificial altar was placed in the courtyard, just before the door of the tabernacle, the incense altar was positioned inside the tabernacle, just before the ark of the covenant. See Altar.
Leviticus 1–7 gives the most detailed description of Israel’s sacrificial system, including five types of sacrifices. The sacrifices and offerings that were brought by the people were to be the physical expression of their inward devotion.

1. Burnt offering (olah) Offered in the morning and in the evening, as well as on special days such as the Sabbath, the new moon, and the yearly feasts (Num. 28–29; 2 Kings 16:15; 2 Chron. 2:4; 31:3; Ezra 3:3–6). Rituals performed after childbirth (Lev. 12:6–8), for an unclean discharge (Lev. 15:14–15) or hemorrhage (Lev. 15:29–30), or after a person who was keeping a Nazirite vow was defiled (Num. 6:10–11) required a burnt offering, as well as a sin offering.
The animal for this sacrifice could be a young bull, lamb, goat, turtledove, or young pigeon, but it had to be a perfect and complete specimen. The type of animal chosen for this sacrifice seems to be dependent on the financial ability of the one who brings the offering. The one bringing the offering was to lay a hand on the animal, indicating that the animal was taking the person’s place, and then he was to kill it. The priest then collected the blood and sprinkled it around the altar and the sanctuary, and the worshiper cut up and skinned the animal. If a bird was brought, the priest killed it. After the priest arranged the various parts on the altar, the entire animal was burned as a sacrifice. The only portion that remained was the hide, and the priest received it (Lev. 7:8). The one who made this sacrifice did so to restore the relationship with God and to atone for some sin. When Araunah offered to David his threshing floor, oxen, and wood without cost so that David could sacrifice, David refused. His explanation was that he could not offer burnt offerings that cost him nothing (2 Sam. 24:18–25).

2. Grain offering (minchah; “meat offering,” KJV) Offering from the harvest of the land; the only type that required no bloodshed. It was composed of fine flour mixed with oil and frankincense. Sometimes this offering was cooked into cakes prior to taking it to the priest. These cakes, however, had to be made without leaven. Every grain offering had to have salt in it (Lev. 2:13), perhaps as a symbol of the covenant (Num. 18:19; 2 Chron. 13:5). Only a portion of this offering was burned on the altar, with the remainder going to the priests. While no reason is given for the grain offering, it may have symbolized the recognition of God’s blessing in the harvest by a society based to a large degree on agriculture. The bringing of a representative portion of the grain harvest was another outward expression of devotion. Grain offerings as well as “drink offerings” or libations of wine accompanied all burnt offerings and peace offerings (Num. 15:3–4).

3. Peace offering (zebach shelamim; “well-being,” NRSV; “shared,” REB; “fellowship,” NIV) Consisting of the sacrifice of a bull, cow, lamb, or goat that had no defect. As with the burnt offering, the individual laid a hand on the animal and killed it. The priests, in turn, sprinkled the blood around the altar. Only certain parts of the internal organs were burned. The priest received the breast and the right thigh (Lev. 7:28–36), but the one who offered the sacrifice was given much of the meat to have a meal of celebration (Lev. 7:11–21). As part of the meal, various kinds of bread were offered (and ultimately kept by the priest). A “peace offering” was to be brought in response to an unexpected blessing (a “thank offering”) or an answer to prayer (a “vow offering”), or for general thankfulness (a “freewill offering”). The idea of thanksgiving was associated with the peace offering. It often accompanied other sacrifices in celebration of events such as the dedication of the temple (1 Kings 8:63) or spiritual renewal (2 Chron. 29:31–36). The “wave offerings” (tenuphah, “consecrated gift”) and the “heave offerings” (terumah, “contribution”) were associated with the peace offerings. They were portions presented or lifted up before the Lord, mentioned first as part of the priestly ordination ceremony (Exod. 29:24–27). Whereas the wave offering was always offered in the sanctuary, the heave offering could be presented anywhere.

4. Sin offering (chattaʾt; “purification,” REB) This was designed to purify the sanctuary from sin that was committed unintentionally, and thereby allow God to continue dwelling with His people. Its nature varied according to who committed the sin. If the priest or the congregation of Israel sinned, then a bull was required. A leader of the people had to bring a male goat, while anyone else sacrificed a female goat or a lamb. The poor were allowed to bring two turtledoves or two young pigeons. The one bringing the offering placed a hand on the animal and then slaughtered it. When the priest or the congregation sinned, the blood was sprinkled seven times before the veil in the sanctuary, and some of it was placed on the horns of the incense altar. The rest of the blood was poured out at the base of the sacrificial altar. For others who sinned, the sprinkling of the blood before the veil was omitted. The same internal organs that were designated for burning in the peace offering were likewise designated in this sacrifice. The rest of the animal was taken outside of the camp to the place where the ashes of the sacrifices were disposed, and there it was burned. These disposal procedures were not followed when the sin offering was made on behalf of a non-priestly person (Lev. 6:24–30). In this case, the priest was allowed to eat some of the meat.

5. Guilt offering (asham, “trespass,” KJV; “reparation,” REB) This offering seems to overlap somewhat with the sin offering (Lev. 4–5). In Lev. 5:6–7 the guilt offering is called a sin offering. The guilt offering was concerned supremely with restitution. Someone who took something illegally was expected to repay it in full plus 20 percent of the value and then bring a ram for the guilt offering. Other instances in which the guilt offering was prescribed included the cleansing of a leper (Lev. 14), having sexual relations with the female slave of another person (Lev. 19:20–22), and for the renewing of a Nazirite vow that had been broken (Num. 6:11–12).
The burnt, grain, peace, sin, and guilt offerings composed the basic sacrificial system of Israel. These sacrifices were commonly used in conjunction with each other and were carried out on both an individual and a corporate basis. The sacrificial system taught the necessity of dealing with sin and, at the same time, demonstrated that God had provided a way for dealing with sin.

Prophets’ Attitude toward the Sacrificial System The prophets spoke harshly about the people’s concept of sacrifice. They tended to ignore faith, confession, and devotion, thinking the mere act of sacrifice ensured forgiveness. Isaiah contended that the sacrifices were worthless when they were not accompanied by repentance and an obedient life (Isa. 1:10–17). Micah reflected the same sentiments when he proclaimed that God was not interested in the physical act of sacrifice by itself but in the life and heart of the one making the sacrifice (Mic. 6:4–6). Jeremiah condemned the belief that as long as the temple was in Jerusalem and the people were faithful to perform the sacrifices, then God would protect them. The symbol of the sacrifice must be reflected in the individual’s life (Jer. 7:1–26). Malachi chastised the people for offering the lame and sick animals to God instead of the best, as the Levitical law required. In doing this, the people were defiling the altar and despising God (Mal. 1:7–14).
The prophets did not want to abolish the sacrificial system. They, instead, denounced the people’s misuse of it. God wanted more than the physical performance of meaningless sacrifices. He desired the offerings to exemplify the heart of the worshiper.

New Testament During the time of the NT the people sacrificed according to the guidelines in the OT. In keeping with the Levitical law (Lev. 12), Mary brought the baby Jesus to the temple and offered a sacrifice for her purification. She sacrificed turtledoves or pigeons, indicating the family’s low financial status. When Jesus healed the leper (Luke 5:12–14), He told him to go to the priest and make a sacrifice (cp. Lev. 14). The cleansing of the temple (John 2) came about because people were selling animals and birds for the various sacrifices within the temple precincts. These people had allowed the “business” of sacrifice to overwhelm the spiritual nature of the offerings. Jesus chided the Pharisees for neglecting family responsibilities by claiming that something was “corban,” or offered to God, and thus unavailable for the care of their parents (Mark 7). Corban is the most common and general Hebrew word for sacrificial offering (Lev. 1:2). See Corban.
The NT consistently describes Christ’s death in sacrificial terms. Hebrews portrays Christ as the sinless high priest who offered Himself up as a sacrifice for sinners (7:27). The superiority of Christ’s sacrifice over the Levitical sacrificial system is seen in that His sacrifice had to be offered only once. The book ends with an encouragement to offer sacrifices of praise to God through Christ. This thought is reflected in 1 Pet. 2 where believers are called a holy and royal priesthood who offer up spiritual sacrifices.
Paul used the terminology of the OT sacrifices in teaching about the death of Jesus. His death was an offering and sacrifice to God and, as such, a fragrant aroma (Eph. 5:2). He associated Jesus with the Passover sacrifice (1 Cor. 5:7).
The first-century church lived in a culture that sacrificed to their gods. Paul and Barnabas at Lystra were thought to be the gods Zeus and Hermes. The priest of Zeus sought to offer sacrifices to them (Acts 14). The church at Corinth was embroiled in a controversy over whether or not it was permissible for Christians to eat meat offered to idols (1 Cor. 8–10). Paul’s preaching of the gospel at Ephesus disrupted the business and worship of the goddess Artemis (Acts 19).
When the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70, the Jews’ sacrificial system ceased. By this time, however, the church had begun to distance itself from Judaism. The biblical view of sacrifice changed as well. In the OT and in the beginning years of the NT, sacrifice was the accepted mode of worship. With the death of Christ, however, animal sacrifice became unnecessary. As the temple and priest of God, the believer now has the responsibility for offering acceptable spiritual sacrifices (Rom. 12:1–2; 1 Pet. 2:5; Heb. 13:15). Paul also spoke of himself as a libation poured out (Phil. 2:17). He called the Philippians’ gift a fragrant aroma and an acceptable sacrifice to God (Phil. 4:18; Rom. 15:16).

Scott Langston and E. Ray Clendenen

E. Ray Clendenen with Langston Scott, “Sacrifice and Offering,” ed. Chad Brand et al., Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003), 1428–1432.

 

 

SACRIFICE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT Predates even the Mosaic covenant. Expressed the Israelites’ relationship with God. The origin of sacrifice may be traced to just after the sin of Adam and Eve.
Sacrifice appears early in the Scriptures, and while not the only means of expression, it is the primary communication of a relationship with God in the Old Testament. Multiple Hebrew words are used to describe the activity and the substance of the sacrifice. The first use of the word “sacrifice” (זָבַח, zavach) is Gen 31:54, but the offerings of Cain and Abel (Gen 4:3–4) also indicate a sacrificial theology. The skin garments Yahweh clothed Adam and Eve with (Gen 3:21) may be indications of an animal sacrifice as well, suggesting a divine prototypical origin of the sacrificial system.
The actual origin of the sacrificial system is uncertain. According to the Documentary Hypothesis, the biblical portrayal of sacrifice presents only later regulations. However, this makes the task of understanding the development of the sacrificial system more difficult—it separates the modern reader from the text (Anderson, “Sacrifice and Sacrificial Offerings (OT)“). R.J. Thompson distinguished between the late, solemn sacrifice and the earlier, celebratory sacrifices (Carpenter, “Sacrifices and Offerings in the Old Testament,” ISBE). Despite this disjunction, the foundational concepts of sacrifice—such as mediation between God and man, and representation of some form of relationship—remain unchanged.

Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East
Animal sacrifice was a standard feature of most ancient Near Eastern religions and the primary means of approaching a deity (Langston and Clendenen, “Sacrifice and Offering“). Pagan religions offered sacrifices to their deities to provide for the gods’ desires and needs. In most of the ancient Near East, gods’ motivations, behaviors, and activities were largely the same as humans’. Sacrifices consisted of those items—food, drink, etc.—that would address those needs (Rooker, Leviticus, 48).
While sacrifices were acts of devotion, they were typically intended to curry favor for a particular act. In this respect, sacrifice was essentially a form of magic—a manipulation of the gods in order to attain favor (Rooker, Leviticus, 48). That is, the motivation for sacrifice was often for the benefit of the worshiper; the placation of the gods was a pragmatic act.
Sacrifice was done both ad hoc and ritualistically. The Babylonians, for example, conducted an annual purification of the temple of Bel through the sacrifice of a ram and the subsequent discarding of its head into the river (Langston and Clendenen, “Sacrifice and Offering,” HIBD). Worshipers who desired divine intervention would provide offerings when necessary to gain favor with their deities.

Biblical Nature of Sacrifice
Old Testament sacrifices affirmed the existence of the covenant—and therefore the relationship—between God and Israel.
Prior to Genesis 31:54, numerous sacrificial events occur (Gen 4:3–4; 8:20–21; 22:1–14; etc.). However, they are usually described as offerings (מִנְחָה, minchah). The reason for the change in terminology in Gen 31:54 is uncertain. Jacob’s sacrifice takes place in the context of a legal ceremony, so it is possible that “sacrifice” has a more formal nuance. All sacrifices are therefore offerings, but not all offerings are necessarily sacrifices—at least in a formal sense (Anderson, “Sacrifice and Sacrificial Offerings (OT)“). This lack of formality coincides with critical theories suggesting an evolution in the theology of sacrifice from celebratory to solemn and from spontaneous to prescribed (Wellhausen, Prolegomena, 61–77ff).
The sacrifice is a binding of two parties to one another. Since the blood of the sacrifice represents its life, a sacrificial bond is of the highest order. Sacrifice is therefore tied to the idea of mediation or communion. It establishes, restores, affirms, or encourages a legal relationship—in the Old Testament this is usually in a covenant context. The Bible’s association of sacrifice and salvation reflects this core tenet: salvation is an expression of a covenant relationship, and sacrifice is a means of establishing that same relationship (Lattey, “Vicarious Solidarity in the Old Testament,” 274).

Similarities of the Biblical Sacrificial System with the Rest of the Ancient Near East. As part of a shared social context, similarities exist between the Bible and other ancient Near Eastern sacrificial procedures:

  •      There are both specified ritual times for sacrifice and provisions for spontaneous personal sacrifices.
  •      Allowances exist for both animal sacrifices and grain sacrifices.
  •      Sacrificial rituals are used to consecrate both the people and places of worship.
  •      The same or similar terms are used for the different forms and acts of sacrifice.

Distinctive Characteristics of the Biblical Sacrificial System. Israel’s sacrificial system reflected their theology and differing from other ancient Near Eastern systems in several ways:

  •      Israelite sacrifices were tied to a moral demand from God (Rooker, Leviticus, 49).
  •      Sacrifice could not atone for deliberate sins; sins committed with “a high hand” had no provision (Num 15:30).
  •      Sacrifice to YHWH affirmed the covenant relationship rather than manipulate God into action.
  •      The Israelite worshiper was expected to participate in the slaying of the sacrifice, engaging in the ritual alongside the priests.
  •      Human sacrifice in any form was not acceptable in Israel, though it was practiced in multiple surrounding cultures (Carpenter, “Sacrifice and Offerings in the Old Testament,” ISBE).

Details of Biblical Sacrifices
Establishing any universal procedures for sacrifice is difficult because of the variety of contexts and time frames recorded in the Bible. If Genesis 3:21 is interpreted as a sacrifice, then biblical sacrifices were initially conducted as a response to divine grace. The grateful sacrifice in Gen 6:20 further supports this notion. However, the sacrifices of Cain and Abel (Gen 4:3–4a) are less easy to categorize.
Three categories of sacrifice can be outlined: status elevation, status maintenance, and status reversal. Sacrifices during the establishment of a covenant relationship are status elevations. Daily sacrifices were for status maintenance. Finally, penitential sacrifices—including the Day of Atonement—seek status reversal (Nelson, Raising up a Faithful Priest, 55–56).

Non-Levitical Sacrifices. Outside of a preference for an altar, there were no set rules for non-Levitical sacrifices. Animal sacrifices were the most common, but sacrifices of fruit were offered as well—as Cain shows. The patriarchal narratives demonstrate that a temporary altar could be constructed as needed in order to complete the sacrifice. Still, the importance of the altar is highlighted by the association of altars with settlement: as soon as a patriarch settled into a new area, one of his first acts was to construct an altar (Gen 12:8; 13:18).
In pre-Mosaic times—and even after the Sinai covenant—the family head officiated the sacrifices (Moberly, Old Testament of the Old Testament, 95). After Sinai, the official sacrifices at the tabernacle or temple were performed by the priests alone. However, there is frequent reference to either folk or pagan sacrifices conducted at various high places by non-Levitical personnel. Even Samuel, who may or may not have been a true Levite, conducted sacrifices at high places—but still upon an altar (1 Sam 9:12). Likewise, Solomon offered sacrifice at the high place in Gibeon (1 Kgs 3:4). This seems to indicate that while Levitical sacrifices were to be restricted to designated locations (the tabernacle or temple), non-Levitical sacrifices could be and were conducted at virtually any location. Most of these sacrifices appear to be whole burnt offerings (Easton, “Burnt Offering”).
Despite the irregularity of many non-Levitical sacrifices, the Passover lamb was—at least initially—a non-Levitical sacrifice conducted by the heads of households. This sacrifice does not demand an altar; the family meal table is in effect the altar for this particular sacrifice, serving to emphasize even more the relational aspect of the practice.

Levitical Sacrifices. Levitical sacrifices were carefully regimented according to the guidelines of the covenant, and they were the exclusive purview of the priests.
While the many variables surrounding biblical sacrifices preclude any comprehensive understanding of non-Levitical sacrifices, the Levitical sacrifices are well detailed—though they likely have undergone postexilic redaction (Nelson, Raising Up a Faithful Priest, 57). Regardless of the specific procedures, the general theologies of both Levitical and non-Levitical sacrifices have the same relational focus. However, the relationship expressed by Levitical sacrifices is distinctly formal and covenantal rather than the less formal, more personal sacrifices of the patriarchs. The five best known and detailed Levitical sacrifices are listed at the beginning of Leviticus (Lev 1–7).

Common Elements of Levitical Sacrifices. While multiple types of sacrifices existed in the Levitical system, they all shared certain traits:

  •      All animal sacrifices were to use a ceremonially clean animal “without blemish” (Lev 1:3; 3:1; 4:3; 5:15).
  •      In all animal sacrifices, the fatty portions were sacred to Yahweh even if other portions of the sacrifice were consumed.
  •      Blood was never consumed but was cast upon the altar.
  •      Animal sacrifices required the worshiper to lay hands upon the offered animal prior to slaughter as a gesture of substitution (Wenham, Book of Leviticus, 61).
  •      All Levitical sacrifices took place in the court before the tent of meeting or—later—the temple.
  •      Unclean portions of a sacrificial animal were taken outside of the camp to be destroyed; they were never burned within the camp.
  •      All Levitical sacrifices allowed exceptions for the poor: if the worshiper lacked a herd animal, animals of the flock, birds or even flour were accepted (Lev 5:7–12).

Whole Burnt Offering. The whole burnt offering (עֹלָה, olah) was the most common of the Levitical sacrifices. It represents a complete surrender to God—demanding a blood sacrifice (Edersheim, Temple, 126). Under the Levitical system, the whole burnt offering was offered “continuously” (Lev 6:9–13) and additionally at appointed times of Sabbath and during the feasts. Additionally, individual worshipers could offer a freewill burnt offering (Easton, “Burnt Offering”). The whole burnt offering was also the only sacrifice that non-Israelites were allowed to bring to the tabernacle or temple (Edersheim, Temple, 127).
The animals for whole burnt offerings were always male. Skins were preserved as payment for the priests, but except for the unclean parts, the sacrifice was completely burned on the altar as a symbol of the worshiper’s total dedication (Edersheim, Temple, 126). The whole burnt offering was also offered in conjunction with other sacrifices. In a series, the sin offering was always offered first. The whole burnt offering followed, and peace offerings were brought last (Rooker, Leviticus, 50). This preserves the relational nature of sacrifices in general and the specific differences between the types of sacrifices: first penance, then dedication, then fellowship.

Grain Offering. The grain offering—also called the cereal or the meal offering—was offered daily as a part of the continuous burnt offering (Thompson, “Sacrifice and Offering,” NBD). It could be offered in multiple forms: raw grains, flour portions, or baked into cakes. It was offered with oil, frankincense, and salt, and could not contain any yeast or honey. After a ceremonial portion was offered on the altar, the remainder of the sacrifice was given to the priests. Whereas the whole burnt offering represented complete surrender to God, the grain offering reflected the worshiper’s dependence on God for provision (Rooker, Leviticus, 99). The grain offering could be offered at any time, but it was always commemorated at the harvest of the firstfruits.

Peace Offering. The peace offering (שֶׁ֫לֶם, shelem), or fellowship offering, celebrated the opportunity to be in fellowship with God. The peace offering was a voluntary offering; worshipers could offer it at will. It was also offered upon completion of a vow (Lev 22:21), and the sacrifices of Pentecost were a form of public peace offering (Edersheim, Temple, 134). Peace offerings were also conducted at times of priestly ordination and upon completion of the Nazirite vow; both occurrences emphasize a covenant fellowship with God (Wenham, Book of Leviticus, 79).
Peace offerings were animal sacrifices, but could only come from the herd or the flock—no bird sacrifices were permitted. The fatty portions went to God as usual, and the right thigh and breast were the priests’ portions. However, either male or female animals could be offered as a part of the peace offering, and the worshiper and his family joined the priests in consuming the sacrifice. The peace offering represented a fellowship meal in which the worshipers and the priests joined with God in partaking (Wenham, Book of Leviticus, 76).

Sin Offering. The sin, or purification, offering (חַטָּאת, chattath) represented confession and repentance for the sinful character of an individual, rather than for a specific act of transgression (Edersheim, Temple, 128). While the sin offering produced “a soothing aroma for the Lord” like other sacrifices, its most significant feature was the casting of blood upon the altar and the veil of the Tabernacle (Wenham, Book of Leviticus, 88). The offering was given at various times—during the feasts of Israel and at new moons, and accompanying the peace offering at the consecration of the priests. It also was given as necessary in private circumstances of uncleanliness, including childbirth, recovery from infection, or bodily discharge (Wenham, Book of Leviticus, 92).
Sin offerings were animal sacrifices, but they allowed for a variety of animals. Herd animals, flock animals, and birds were all acceptable; females from the flock were acceptable as well. In instances of communal or high priestly sin, the sin offering was not offered upon the altar. It was burned outside of the tabernacle or temple area (Meyers, “Sin Offering,” EBD). The blood of the sin offering is dealt with more specifically than in other offerings, and it was mixed with incense prior to its spreading on the altar and sprinkling on the veil of the tabernacle. The incense was symbolic of intercession, and so the sacrifice combined elements of the life of the worshiper and the plea for intercession (Rooker, Leviticus, 111). At the same time, the sin offering was limited in its atoning properties. It was explicitly for unintentional sin (Lev 4:2, 13, 22, 27). There was no Levitical sacrifice intended for deliberate or “high handed” sins (compare Num 15:30–31).
The sacrifice of the annual Day of Atonement was performed with exceptional solemnity and differed from the standard sin offering. It was the one time each year that the holy of holies could be entered, and the blood from the sin offering was cast upon the ark—specifically the mercy seat—itself rather than on the veil. Also, the sin offering on the Day of Atonement was not one sacrifice, but a series of sacrifices that atoned for the high priest four times and the nation as a whole three times (Rooker, Leviticus, 212). The scapegoat is another addition to the sin offering during the Day of Atonement. Rather than being slaughtered, the scapegoat was sent to a land that was “cut off” from the nation—indicating the need to completely remove sin from the presence of the land (Wenham, Book of Leviticus, 234–35).

Guilt Offering. The guilt offering (אָשָׁם, asham) is also called the trespass or the reparation offering. It is closely related to the sin offering. The two offerings are differentiated by the issue of compensation: the sin offering offers no compensation while the guilt offering provides restitution (Rooker, Leviticus, 122–23). They are also differentiated by the inclusion of provision for deliberate transgression against one’s neighbor (Lev 6:1–7 [MT 5:20–26]). Wenham suggests that the differences between sin and guilt offerings—despite their close association—represent multiple analogies for the complexity of sin’s impact on relationships (Wenham, Book of Leviticus, 111).
The guilt offering specifically demanded a male ram or lamb. The blood of the sacrifice was cast on the altar and the fatty portions burned, as with other sacrifices. The remaining portion of the animal went to the priests. Additionally, a monetary payment of 120 percent accompanied the sacrifice to indicate the realization of indebtedness (Rooker, Leviticus, 124). The guilt offering therefore not only addressed the need to be forgiven by God, but also to restore community with other humans (Wenham, Book of Leviticus, 110–11).

Bibliography
  Albertz, Rainer. History of Israelite Religion in the Old Testament Period 1–2. Translated by J. Bowden. Old Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1992–1994.
  Anderson, Gary A. “Sacrifice and Sacrificial Offerings (OT).” Anchor Bible Dictionary 4. Edited by David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
  Bromiley, Geoffrey W., ed. International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Rev. ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986.
  Easton, M.G. Easton’s Bible Dictionary. Oak Harbor, Wash.: Logos Research Systems, 1996.
  Edersheim, Alfred. Temple: Its Ministries and Services as they were at the Time of Jesus Christ. Bellingham, Wash.: Logos Research Systems, 2003.
  Herbert, A.S. Worship in Ancient Israel. Richmond: John Knox, 1959.
  Kaufmann, Y. Religion of Israel. Translated by M. Greenberg. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1960.
  Lattey, Cuthbert. “Vicarious Solidarity in the Old Testament.” Vetus Testamentum 1:4 (1951): 267–74.
  Langston, Scott, and E. Ray Clendenen. “Sacrifice and Offering.” Pages 1428–32 in Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary. Edited by C. Brand, C. Draper, et al. Nashville: Holman Bible, 2003.
  Nelson, Richard. Raising Up a Faithful Priest. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1993.
  Rooker, Mark F. Leviticus. New American Commentary 3a. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2000.
  Vriezen, T.C. Religion of Ancient Israel. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1967.
  Wellhausen, Julius. Prolegomena to the History of Israel. Reprint ed. Translated by J. Sutherland. Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black, 1885.
  Wenham, Gordon J. Book of Leviticus. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.
  Wood, D.R.W., and I.H. Marshall, eds. New Bible Dictionary. 3rd ed. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1996.

JOHN T. SWANN

John T. Swann, “Sacrifice in the Old Testament,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012, 2013, 2014).

 

 

The Temple and the Rituals

The gods’ needs were not cared for just so that the people would be graced with good harvests. The temple was the control center for order in the cosmos and that order had to be maintained. The deity needed to be cared for so that he/she could focus his/her energies on the important work of holding forces of chaos at bay. The rituals, therefore, served not simply as gifts to the deity or mechanical liturgical words and actions. The rituals provided a means by which humans could play a role in maintaining order in the cosmos.53
Priests were the specialists who possessed the knowledge and the responsibility for ensuring that access to sacred space was protected and that rituals were properly performed. The god’s privacy needed to be guarded and his needs met so that he could be about his cosmic business. Creation was renewed and maintained through the various rituals and ceremonies.54
Egyptian thinking attached this function not only to the role of priests but also to the role of the king. In Egypt priests operated only by authority delegated from the king, who had the sole right to perform the rituals of the cult.55 It was his task “to complete what was unfinished, and to preserve the existent, not as a status quo but in a continuing, dynamic, even revolutionary process of remodeling and improvement.”56 Thus in the ritual observances the order of the cosmos not only was maintained but was transferred to society, resulting in political and social order.57 “The royal performance of the cult, generally speaking, invoked the sacred power for the preservation of maat, the order of the world.”58
Assmann summarizes the system well: “The world thus maintained is a world of meaning, of language, of knowledge, of relations and reflections, an anthropomorphic reading of the universe with a correspondingly cosmomorphic image of human order. The hourly ritual bans cosmic chaos, and with it the chaos in man himself.”59
Sacrifices played an important role in this system. As the food of the gods, it is arguably the most important provision to sustain their presence, favor, and the smooth operation of the cosmos. Conventions for the transference of the food to the divine realm varied from culture to culture—from formal presentation of the offering on a stand of some sort to a ritual of destruction. Beckman places Hittite practice in the latter category: “The general principle underlying Hittite offering technique was that the material presented had to be destroyed, in whole or in part, in order to pass over to the intended recipient in the para-human world. Thus liquids were poured out (on the ground, offering table, or altar), breads were broken or crumbled, vessels were smashed, and animals were killed.”60

It would be a mistake to think that sacrifices primarily involved the ritual slaughter of animals. Other typical foodstuffs included grain products, dairy products, baked goods, fruit, eggs, and a variety of liquids, from beer or wine to milk to honey or oil. When animals were offered, they tended to be the domesticated animals that had a role in the economy.61 In Mesopotamia bulls and sheep were most common, but offerings also included birds, fish, or bandicoot rats.62 Pigs and dogs would typically be offered only to chthonic deities or in offerings to the dead.63 In Egypt meat was not a common element in the sacrificial ritual, but it was present in most other cultures.64 In most cases the meat then became the basis for a feast shared by the deity, the offering priest, and the worshiper. The parts given to deity varied. Hittite practice shows some similarity to Israelite rituals: “The gods preferred the fat and those organs thought to be the seat of life and emotions—liver and heart above all, but also the gall bladder and the kidneys. These entrails were roasted over the flame, chopped and served to the recipient on bread. The remainder of the carcass was dismembered, cooked as a stew, and shared by the humans present.”65
In all of these areas we can see that the actual ritual practices show some degree of commonality across the ancient world, including Israel. Likewise the role of ritual as undergirding the smooth operation of the cosmos and securing the favor and presence of the deity is everywhere evident. The main difference seen in the cognitive worldview of Israel concerned the extent to which Yahweh had needs that were met by rituals, or the way in which the giving of gifts influenced deity.

John H. Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006), 130–134.

 

 

Excursus: The Attractions of Idolatry

  1. Guaranteed: Ancients assumed that the presence of a god or goddess was guaranteed by the presence of an idol since the idol “partook” of the very essence of the divinity it was designed to represent. When, for example, a statue of a given god was carved and certain ritual incantations spoken over that statue to cause the essence of the god to enter it, the statue was then understood to become a functioning conduit for anything done in its presence from the worshiper to that god.26 In the same way that a modern persons might speak to and look into a sound-equipped television camera knowing that their words and actions were being transmitted accurately to other locations, ancient people believed that the offerings they brought before an idol of a god and the prayers they said in the idol’s presence were fully and unfailingly perceived by the god whom that idol represented.27
  2. Selfish: Idolatry was an entire materialistic system of thinking and behavior, sometimes called the “fertility cult,” built on the idea that the gods could do virtually anything but feed themselves. The one sort of “hold” or advantage humans had over the gods was the ability to feed them. Accordingly, it was felt that if one fed a given god, that god was in turn obligated to use his power on behalf of the feeder-worshiper. Not much else was required; if you fed a god adequately and regularly, that god would, in “quid pro quo” fashion, bless you in return with abundance of crops, fertility of cattle.
  3. Easy: Frequency and generosity of worship (offering sacrifices) were the sole significant requirements of faithful idolatrous religion. Idolatry minimized the importance of ethical behavior. Ritual provision of food to the gods was important; keeping a divinely revealed covenant was not. At Sinai the Israelites took upon themselves the obligation to live as a holy people, subjecting themselves to obedience to hundreds of individual commandments so as to conform their lives ethically to Yahweh’s will, including the faithful offering of sacrifices to the true God. By contrast, idolatry was easy, requiring sacrifices but little else.
  4. Convenient: Deut 12:2 requires that the Israelites “destroy completely all the places on the high mountains and on the hills and under every spreading tree where the nations you are dispossessing worship their gods.” Comparably, 1 Kgs 14:23 reports of Israelite idolaters that “they also set up for themselves high places, sacred stones and Asherah poles on every high hill and under every spreading tree.” These ubiquitous idol shrines allowed worshipers to take a sacrifice to the god or goddess of their choice virtually any time of day, any day of the week, and at a location nearby any place they happened to be. By contrast, Yahweh’s covenant required all Israelites to report to a single, central location three times a year, necessitating costly and time-consuming travel for many and prohibiting worship anywhere in the land but that single, approved sanctuary.28
  5. Normal: Idolatry was the common way of religion—without exception outside Israel—in the ancient world. This made it seem entirely normal since no one could find any parallel to the Israelite covenant obligation to worship an invisible God outside of the area of Yahweh’s special revelation to his people. Idolatry was, as well, the settled, experienced Canaanite way. When the Israelites entered Canaan, they could hardly help thinking that the successful farming methods of the Canaanites necessarily involved various idolatrous magical rituals used for generations, from boiling a goat kid in its mother’s milk (see comments on 23:19) to sowing a crop in a special pattern with two different kinds of plant seeds (Lev 19:19; Deut 22:9). If an Israelite asked a Canaanite neighbor, “How do you farm around here?” the Canaanite neighbor probably would start his explanation with a description of how to make proper offerings to Baal and Asherah in advance of preparing the fields and planting (or other farm duties) in order to ensure the fertility of the farm. Moreover, idolatry was the way of the superpowers and the economically successful states, whose riches and prestige seemed to go hand in hand with their idolatrous rites.
  6. Logical: Idolatry was polytheistic, syncretistic, and pantheistic. The ancients believed in a multiplicity of gods—every one being a specialist in some aspect of the world or nature; and therefore the ancients found it enormously attractive to think they could gain assured access to those gods through idols. It was unthinkable to most ancients that a single god could be the only God. The idea of a “general practitioner” having to be responsible for all the various divine duties was simply not part of the mind-set of ancient peoples, and it seems to have been, indeed, hard even for most Israelites to imagine as well, judging from the frequency to which they turned to polytheistic idolatry in their history.
  Ancient people also believed in three categories of gods, all of which any individual was likely to differentiate by his or her own beliefs and worship: the personal god, the family god, and the national god. For most Israelites at most times, and for all other people who knew anything about Israel’s God, Yahweh was merely a national god. Ancient Israelites might have, say, Dagon (Judg 16:23; 1 Sam 5; 1 Chr 10:10) as their personal god and perhaps Baal (e.g., Judg 2:13; 6:25, 28, 30–32; 1 Kgs 16:31–32) as their family god, but they would always have Yahweh as his national God. No Israelite, no matter how totally immersed in idolatry, would ever answer no to the question, “Do you believe in Yahweh?” But most, at most times in Israel’s history, would, sadly, see him only as a national god (the one who had brought them out of Egypt or the one to whom they would appeal in times of war). Their greater day-by-day loyalty in worship would be directed toward the various idols representing their various categories of gods.29
  7. Pleasing to the senses: 1 Kgs 19:18 describes the Israelite practice of worshiping the fertility-weather god Baal by, in part, bowing down to his idol and kissing it. Ezekiel 8:9ff. details some of the extensive depictions of various creatures in idolatrous form worshiped in Jerusalem. Idolatry provided worshipers with images of divinity pleasing to the eyes, spawned a whole, entrenched industry of image making (cf. Acts 19:24–27), and appealed to the sensual, even, broadly speaking, to the “artistic” in the people. It was hard to appreciate the beauty or attractiveness of someone who refused to be seen, that is, Yahweh.
  8. Indulgent: Although the Israelites were permitted by the covenant to eat meat whenever they chose (Deut 12:15), the usual pagan practice was to eat meat only as part of a worship sacrifice to an idol. That way, a portion of the sacrifice would go to the idol as a burnt offering, a portion to the priest representing the idol (and his family), and the remainder to the worshiper and his family, thus never “wasting” the effect of eating meat but rather getting double value from the meat: nutrition for oneself and favor with the idol god. Accordingly, the more frequently one ate meat (since it was always eaten in connection with worship) and the more meat one ate (since thereby the god’s portion was increased), the more likely one could curry favor with the gods. “Pigging out” thus typified pagan sacrifices, in contrast to the more clearly symbolic value of an orthodox Israelite’s worship.30 Heavy drinking and drunkenness31 also were considered proper in idol worship feasts because debauching oneself was simply part of being generous to a god.32
  9. Erotic: Temple prostitution is described at various points in the Old Testament. Behind it lay the notion that all creation was in fact procreation, so everything that would exist had to be born into existence. When this was coupled with the “sympathetic magic” idea that things done symbolically in one location might cause certain behaviors in another, ritual worship sex performed in order to stimulate the gods to produce fertility on earth was the result. Ancient pagan worshipers were taught that if they, taking the symbolic role of, say, Baal, would have sex with a temple prostitute symbolically portraying, say, Asherah, this act would stimulate Baal and Asherah to have sex in heaven, which in turn would stimulate things to be born on earth: the young of flocks and herds, as well as the seedlings of all desired plants. Sex thus became a regular aspect of idol worship and was so widely practiced even at the Jerusalem temple in Israelite times that Josiah’s reform had to pay special attention to its eradication (2 Kgs 23:6–7); similarly, in northern Israel Amos noted the way father and son would visit the same temple prostitute (Amos 2:7–8).33

Douglas K. Stuart, Exodus (vol. 2; The New American Commentary; Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2006), 450–454.