Your ShelfYour Projects

Yom Hakkippurim

6%

Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, Cal. · Oct 18, 1883

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 9, No. 39.

Read the full edition

“Yom Hakkippurim.”

THIS is the Hebrew form used in Lev. 23:27 for “day of atonement.” It is the plural of yom kippur, from the verbal root kah-phar, to cover. Why the plural is used we are not able to say, unless it be taken to represent the aggregate, the sum of the work for all the people. This year the day fell on Thursday, Oct. 11, it being always on the tenth day of the seventh month in the Hebrew calendar.
This is the great day of Judaism. It is, as a Rabbi once said to us, the day of Judgment. We have no doubt that this is the correct Scriptural idea of the day, it being a type of the period of the closing work of the priest, the antitype of Melchisedek, being the actual work of the Judgment for the people of God, for their full acquittal and final justification, preparatory to their translation.
We find an interesting article on this subject in the Jewish Times, of San Francisco, of Oct. 5, which we feel strongly inclined to reproduce in our columns. But our present object is to call attention to one idea contained therein, presented in the following words:—
“No one will deny that among the various festivals and holidays consecrated to religious worship among men, none are found comparable with our Day of Atonement. The idea that individual transgressions should be expiated and removed by contrition, abstention from food, and sincere penance, has never taken root outside of Israel.”
On this day the business houses of the Jews, of which there are many on Broadway in Oakland, are scrupulously closed, and that people entirely abstain from food during the whole day.
The Jews are not the only people who believe in fasting, but the Times is doubtless correct in its statement that they alone believe in remission of sin through this means. And with them the idea is comparatively modern. They never derived it from their Scriptures. It cannot be drawn from the writings of Moses and the prophets. It has grown up among them under their peculiar circumstances. Since the destruction of their temple in Jerusalem, by Titus, they have had no kodesh or sanctuary in which to present an offering before the Lord.
The Scriptures are always reasonable, whatever infidels may say to the contrary. When the Lord gave his commandments to Israel, he suspended the issue of life and death upon their obedience. “See, I have set before thee this day life and good, death and evil; in that I command thee this day to love the Lord thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments.” Deut. 30:15, 16. “Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments; which if a man do, he shall live in them.” Lev. 18:5. And so it was said through the prophet, “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.” Eze. 18:4. God is the author of life, and man is his creature; the right both to order and to dispose of life rests with him alone. The penalty for the violation of the law of God is the death penalty. “The wages of sin is death.”
What, then, would reason teach us is necessary to save the sinner from death, without impairing the integrity of the law and the Government? The idea presented in the law of Moses is that of sacrifice. And the idea underlying the sacrifice is that of substitution. “If any man of you bring an offering unto the Lord, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, of the herd, and of the flock. . . . And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him. And he shall kill the bullock before the Lord; and the priests, Aaron’s sons, shall bring the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar,” &c. Lev. 1:2, 4, 5. And upon yom kippur, the day of atonement for all the people, the high priest was to take a goat for a sin offering, as follows: “Then shall he kill the goat of the sin offering, that is for the people, and bring his blood within the vail, 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 atonement for the sanctuary [hak-ko-desh], because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel,” &c. Lev. 16:15, 16.
In these instances, as also in all others, the atonement was made with blood. And the reason of this is given in the same book. We have noticed that it was appointed unto the sinner to die. By sinning man forfeits his life. How was this forfeiture to be met? The Lord revealed by Moses as follows: “For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that maketh atonement for the soul.” Lev. 17:11. Life is the forfeit, and the life being in the blood, the blood represents the life, the forfeit. It is literally life for life. As is said in Lev. 1:4; the offering is accepted for the sinner; its blood (or life) for his life.
The word atonement is used in a limited sense, in the Old Testament, in one or two instances, as the word forgiveness or pardon is used in a limited sense in the New Testament. Matt. 18. But this does not at all militate against the truth stated in the Old Testament, that “it is the blood that maketh atonement for the soul,” or the statement of the same truth in the New, as follows: “Without shedding of blood is no remission.” Heb. 9:22.
In Lev. 16:31, the Lord said of the tenth day of the seventh month: “It shall be a sabbath of rest unto you, and ye shall afflict your souls, by a statute forever.” And, of the same in Lev. 23:32, “It shall be unto you a sabbath of rest, and ye shall afflict your souls.” This was necessary in order that the work of the high priest in the sanctuary might avail for them. But the affliction of soul, fasting and prayer, did not make the atonement. It did not remove any past guilt. That was the work of the priest; and the efficacy of his work depended solely on the blood which was sprinkled upon and before the mercy-seat. It was the blood which made atonement for the soul; it was the blood which cleansed and hallowed the sanctuary from the uncleanness, the sins of the children of Israel. It was through the work of the priest that Israel was accepted of the Lord; and it was solely by virtue of the blood of the sin offering that the priest was accepted as the representative of the people.
The same truth was taught in the festival of the passover. A number of things were enjoined upon the children of Israel in their preparations for leaving Egypt, one of which was that they should put the blood of the lamb of the pa-sach upon the lintel and posts of the door. “For the Lord will pass through to smite the Egyptians, and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel, and upon the two side-posts, the Lord will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you.” Ex. 12:23. Though everything else were done as it was ordered, if the blood had not been seen upon the lintel and posts of the door, the angel of destruction would have visited them as he did the Egyptians.
The idea of atonement by blood, because it is the life, and of substitution to vindicate the honor of the broken law in the sinner’s behalf, is as reasonable as it is apparent in the Mosaic law. But it only reaches its logical or reasonable conclusion in the Christian system. This speaks as follows: “It is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins.” Heb. 10:4. This is according to the just principle that, though the greater may be accepted for the less, the less cannot reasonably be accepted for the greater. On yom kippur the high priest offered the blood of a bull for himself and for his house, and the blood of a goat for the whole house of Israel. This was an offering to the Lord for the sins of all the people. By sin all the people had forfeited their lives, as it was said by the prophet, “The soul that sinneth it shall die.” But a goat is not as valuable as a man. Its blood or life is not as precious as the blood or life of a man. How much less could a goat answer as the true and just equivalent of a whole nation. So reasonable is the declaration that the blood of a goat cannot take away sins, that a man who was condemned to death would feel that he was dishonored if the Government should offer to accept the life of a goat in his stead. “Am I,” he might inquire, “of so little worth that I can be ransomed by a goat?” But he would feel highly honored if a “prince of the blood” should offer to die in his stead. This would humble him, and cause him to feel the great demerit of his sin. He would by this be led to turn away from sin, which was so offensive to the Government, and required so great a sacrifice.
But it may be asked, “Is not this a reflection on the revelation which God made to Israel?” It is not; as we before said, it is the logical result of that system, and is the true teaching of the law and the prophets. The insufficiency of those sacrifices was clearly taught in such scriptures as Psalm 50, and the first chapter of Isaiah. It is only as types that they were useful and instructive. It was plainly revealed that a priest should arise after the order of Melchisedek; and as clearly revealed that the anointed—the Mashiah—should “be cut off (but not for himself),” Dan. 9:24-26. The prophecy of Isaiah, especially chapters 52 and 53, clearly sets forth all that the Christians claim on this subject. The “servant” of the Lord who was to be exalted very high, before whom kings should shut their mouths, was prophesied of as one “wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities.” His soul was made an offering for sin. How impressive are the words of the prophet: “Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he has poured out his soul unto death; and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.”
We admire, we reverence, and we love Judaism and the Hebrew Scriptures. They are the only foundation of the Christian system. But Israel has nearly lost the spirit of “the law and the prophets.” The Scriptures have not changed, but the people have changed. They have been so long without a sanctuary and a priest and an offering that they do not deem these things essential to the system of Judaism. But in truth they are the heart and life of Judaism. And the glory which has departed from the sons of Abraham would return if they would fully accept the teachings of their own prophets concerning the Lord’s Anointed, the Messiah, and of the true nature and use of sacrifice for sin. We make our plea before Israel to-day as Paul made his defense before Agrippa, “Saying none other things than the prophets and Moses did say should come: that the Anointed should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should show light unto the people, and to the nations.” Acts 26:22, 23.