Christ Our Sacrifice and Priest
By Uriah Smith
MAN'S SIN AND SAVIOUR. NO. 6.
Christ Our Sacrifice and Priest.
ONE year's work completed a round of service in the sanctuary in the type. The reason for this is given by Paul in Heb. 7: 23. The priests of that dispensation were mortal men, and could not continue long, by reason of death. Hence, in order that the same man might go through the whole round of service in the sanctuary as high priest, and so the more fitly typify Christ, a complete round of service was limited to one year. But Christ ever lives, and so can complete his ministry in one grand round of service, however long the time may be. Heb. 7: 24; 9: 12, 26; 10: 10-12. To avail ourselves of the merits of the offering of Christ, we come to God and plead Christ as our propitiation, and then we receive pardon through the efficacy of his blood, the same as the penitent who brought his victim to the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of old. But when the ministry of our High Priest is changed to the most holy place, let us consider what will be the nature of the work then to take place. The work in the most holy of the heavenly sanctuary will constitute the close of Christ's work as Mediator for the world. It will constitute the great work of atonement which he is to perform for men, the putting away of their sin in fact and once for all, through the merits of his own blood. Thus it was figuratively set forth in the type; and this fact shows that the atonement is a specific portion of Christ's ministerial work, and comes at the conclusion of his ministry and not at its beginning. A great error misleads Christendom on this point. It is generally affirmed that Christ made the atonement on the cross. Two great and most mischievous errors spring from this view. The first is that of universal salvation. Thus, in John 1: 29 we read, "The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh [margin, "beareth"] away the sin of the world." And Peter (1 Peter 2: 24) says, "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree." If we make these passages refer to the atonement, it would follow that the sins of the whole world were atoned for on the cross. Then the salvation of the whole world is inevitable; for whatever sins are atoned for, they will be thus disposed of and put away, and can never come up against the sinner to condemn him. Hence the whole world will be found at last free from sin, and be saved. But this will not do; for the Scriptures positively teach that all the world will not be saved; so another error has to be adopted to avoid this one. The second error is this: that when Christ died upon the cross, he did not die for all the world, but only for a favored few, previously chosen and predestinated to this great blessing of salvation. But this is the most ultra doctrine of election or predestination, and equally unscriptural with the other. And, besides, this view contradicts the testimony quoted above from John and Peter, that Christ died for the sins of the whole world. A correct view of the subject of the sanctuary enables one to avoid both these errors, and makes all the statements of the Bible harmonious and consistent. From this subject we learn that Christ acts in two capacities, first as a sacrifice and then as a priest. It was as a sacrifice, slain by the hands of wicked men, that he died upon the cross. Here the sins of the world were laid upon him, and as a sacrifice provided for all who would accept of him, he bore them. But when he comes to act as priest, to make the atonement, he atones only for the sins of such persons as have by repentance and faith sought pardon from him. So the saved at last are not all the world, nor only a predestinated and favored few, but all who have sought salvation and pardon in the appointed and provided way. Christ's work of atonement in the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary will decide the destiny of all men; for before he ceases to act as priest, it must be seen how many have accepted of his offered salvation, and he must confess their names before his Father. Matt. 10: 32; Luke 12: 8; Rev. 3: 5. And when his work as priest is ended, he takes his position as King of kings and Lord of lords. Rev. 19: 11-16. But this work of deciding the final destinies of men is the judgment; for it is the province of the judgment first to pass upon the character of men, and assign rewards and punishments accordingly. And this work of deciding all cases must be performed before the second coming of Christ in the clouds of heaven. A moment's reflection will show this; for when he comes he brings his reward with him, to give to every man according as his work shall be. And there is no time then given to investigate anyone's life and character, apportion rewards or punishments, or to do any work of investigative judgment; but a change is immediately accomplished for two classes of people, the righteous dead84are raised from their graves, separated from all the wicked dead, who still slumber on till the second resurrection (Rev. 20: 5), and the righteous living are changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, while the living wicked are left to perish beneath the judgments of God (1 Cor. 15: 51, 52; Rev. 19: 21). THE INVESTIGATIVE JUDGMENT.
How is it known thus instantaneously who are to receive these blessings of a resurrection from the dead and a change to immortality when Christ comes? Answer—It has been decided by a previous work of judgment, which is none other than this closing work of Christ as priest in the sanctuary on high. But all judgment is rendered according to what we have done; and what we have done is known from the record of our deeds, which is kept for this purpose. John, describing another judgment scene, presents this feature, which must be the rule in all judgment work. He says: "And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works." Rev. 20: 12. The decisions of this investigative judgment at the close of Christ's priestly work must also be rendered according to the "things which are written in the books." The work in the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary therefore involves an examination of the books of record, or the investigation of the characters of all those cases that come before that tribunal. As expressing the great feature of this work, we may therefore call it "the investigative judgment." By way of dissent from the view here presented, it may be said that this does not correspond with the type; for there were no books of record there examined, nor any rendering of judgment therefrom. Very true, and for the very good reason that that was an earthly, not a heavenly transaction; it was a work performed by mortal men, not by divine beings; it was the nearest approach that could be made to the real investigative judgment, by human agencies. The significance was all there in figure, without the particular and definite acts by which the real work of atonement will be carried out. And in reference to this imperfection, Paul says, "The law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things," etc. Heb. 10: 1. This investigative work in the sanctuary on high results in one of two ways in every case examined. First, it will be found either that the person has truly repented of his sins and received pardon, and so his sins can be and will be blotted out of the books of remembrance (Mal. 3: 16; Acts 3: 19), or, secondly, it will be found that in his Christian life he has not been an overcomer, and his name will then be blotted out of the book of life (Rev. 3: 5). The object of this sanctuary work being simply to decide to which class a person belongs, that is, whether he is one who is to be saved, or one who is to have for his portion the second death, only those cases will come up for examination whose names have once been entered in the book of life; for with respect to all others this great question is already decided. If they have never had their names in the book of life at all, they cannot of course have their part among the saved. They are condemned already. This blotting out of sin is the cleansing of the sanctuary. This is the atonement. And when all cases have been examined, and the sins of all the righteous have been atoned for and blotted from the books, these sins are to be borne from the sanctuary by the high priest, and laid, according to the type, on the head of the scapegoat. Lev. 16: 20, 21. But we are now looking at the heavenly temple, and in this last great antitypical work who is the scapegoat, upon whom all the sins borne from the sanctuary are at last to be laid? The view generally held on this point is that Christ is the scapegoat. This idea, like that of the atonement on the cross, springs also, we think, from the vague views of the work of Christ in his priestly office, which so widely prevail. Several reasons seem conclusively to show that Christ cannot act in the capacity of the scapegoat. OF WHOM IS THE SCAPEGOAT A TYPE?
First, the scapegoat was one of two goats selected, as we have seen, on the day of atonement, for two very different purposes. One was slain and its blood was used to make an atonement in the sanctuary. That goat certainly typified Christ. So it would seem impossible that the other goat, used for an entirely different purpose, should typify Christ also. Secondly, when Christ bore the sins of the world, it was on the cross, before his work as priest began. But sins are not laid upon the scapegoat, and he sent away with them, till the work of the high priest in the sanctuary is finished. Christ cannot therefore be the scapegoat. Thirdly, the high priest laid the sins of the people on the scapegoat, and he was sent away by the hand of a fit man, not the priest himself, into the wilderness to perish. But Christ is certainly our great High Priest. How can he then be at the same time the goat upon which the priest lays the sins of the people? He does not lay the sins upon himself, and send himself away with them to perish. Fourthly, the scapegoat was sent away into a land of separation, or a land not inhabited. So, if Christ is the antitype, he must be sent away from, not to, his people; not into heaven, for that is not a land "not inhabited," but from heaven to some desolate region, to come no more into the congregation of the people of the Lord. This surely will not be Christ's fate. He cannot, therefore, be the antitype of the scapegoat. Fifthly, the scapegoat retained the sins of the people and perished with them; but when Christ comes the second time, he comes "without sin unto salvation." Heb. 9: 28. As Christ cannot be the antitype of the scapegoat, the mind naturally turns to a being of just the opposite character, and one better answering to the idea suggested by the name itself, and that is to Satan. When the lots were cast on the two goats on the day of atonement, one was inscribed, according to Mr. Charles Beecher ("Redeemer and Redeemed," page 70), "La Jehovah," that is, for Jehovah, the other, "La Azazel," for Azazel. Who, then, was Azazel? The idea that this was a name for Satan is not a latter-day novelty; for Jenks, in his Comprehensive Commentary on Lev. 16: 8, says: "Spencer, after the oldest opinion of the Hebrews and Christians, thinks Azazel is the name of the devil, and so Rosenmuller, whom see. The Syriac has Azazil, the 'angel (strong one) who revolted.'" In further confirmation of this view Mr. Beecher (pp. 67, 68) refers to the Chaldee Paraphrase, the Targums of Onkelos, and Jonathan, the Septuagint, the book of Enoch, the Jewish work, "Zohar," and the testimony of Cabalistic and Rabbinical writers, Origen and Hengstenberg. Professor Bush is also quoted as regarding Azazel as a proper name for Satan. Against this application of the scapegoat one expression (Lev. 16: 10) is sometimes urged, which reads: "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." On this it is claimed that if the scapegoat is Satan, then Satan in part makes the atonement. Not by any means. The text does not say that the scapegoat made any part of the atonement, but that the priest made an atonement with him; that is, the priest alone makes the atonement, but, in completing the work, he has something to do with the scapegoat; and that which he did with him was only to lay upon him the sins of the people after he had removed them from the sanctuary, and to send him away to perish with them. So it will be most consistent and appropriate for our Great High Priest above, after atoning for the sins of his people with his own precious blood, and removing them from the sanctuary, to roll them back upon the head of the antitypical scapegoat, the father and promoter of all sin, the devil. Thus Satan makes no part of the atonement, but, as he acted a terrible part in the introduction of sin, so he has to act an ignominious and to him fearful part in putting away the evil of his own designing. And what adds greatly to the strength of this view is the fact that in the experience of Satan, as revealed to us in the Scriptures, there is a scene which answers most fitly to the ancient ceremony of sending away the scapegoat to perish in the wilderness. John, speaking of events attending the close of Christ's work as priest, when he takes to himself his kingdom, and comes as King of kings and Lord of lords, to triumph over all his foes, tells us in the following words what is done with Satan, the head of the rebellious hosts: "And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years." And John further declares that at the end of the thousand years he perishes utterly in the lake of fire. Rev. 20: 10, 14. Then sin and sinners are forever blotted out of the universe, and the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Matt. 13: 40-43. From this view of the subject it will be seen that the moment of greatest interest to the world is the time when the ministry begins in the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary and the brief and closing work of making the atonement and cleansing the sanctuary is entered upon. Have we any means of ascertaining the time when this takes place? To this question there is an answer which ought to thrill every heart. The answer is, We have. One great line of prophecy, of surpassing interest, is devoted to this very purpose. It reads as follows: "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." Dan. 8: 14. As we have seen that the sanctuary of the Bible is virtually one existing first as the type—the tabernacle of Moses—in the old85dispensation, and then as the antitype—the heavenly sanctuary—in this, we have only to ascertain in what dispensation the twenty-three hundred days end to know to what sanctuary—typical or antitypical—the prophecy applies.