atonement

Sacrifice and Atonement in the New Testament

by

New Testament Christianity stands in the tradition of Israelite sacrificial worship in viewing Jesus Christ as the ultimate and final sacrifice.

The Sacrifice of Christ

The earliest Christians of Jerusalem frequented the temple for prayer and considered themselves Jews, although they were aware that the sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary had put an end to the requirements of Moses’ law. Luke records that Paul made a vow that involved a sacrifice at the temple in Jerusalem in order to appease the Jews (Acts 21:20–26). However, the writer of Hebrews is adamant in his argument that Jewish sacrificial ritual and all that pertained to the old covenant were made obsolete when Christ’s death initiated the new covenant (Heb. 8:1–13; 10:1–18).

The Concept of Atonement

The concept of atonement, so prominent in the sacrificial theology of the worship of Israel, is also important in the New Testament. Jesus Christ is called the hilastērion (Rom. 3:25), literally “instrument of propitiation,” the word used in the Greek Old Testament for the kapporet of the ark (Rom. 3:25). The word, also translated “expiation,” identifies Christ as the one who stands between the Lord and the covenant people as their covering, or atonement. John pictures this mediating role of Christ in his description of the victorious Lamb who is between the throne and the twenty-four elders who represent the redeemed of all ages (Rev. 5:6).

In both Old and New Testaments, it is the Lord who initiates atonement, and not the people. Because God chooses to overlook sin and maintain the covenant relationship, he provides a covering: the blood of the sacrifice applied to the ark in the Old Testament and the blood of his Son applied to the heavenly ark in the New Testament (Heb. 9:11). It is also the Lord who provides a substitute by instituting the sacrificial system under the Mosaic law and by giving his own Son as a sacrifice in the new covenant (Heb. 9:12–14). The offering of Isaac by his father, Abraham, with the ram provided as a substitute sacrifice, is a poignant picture of the substitutionary death of Christ in behalf of his people (Gen. 22:1–14).

Some Bible expositors teach that the temple will eventually be rebuilt in Jerusalem and the sacrificial system reinstated. Whether this actually occurs is irrelevant, since the death of Christ has made all such offerings unnecessary and inappropriate. Jesus Christ stands between Yahweh and the covenant people as their atonement covering, having become the sacrifice for their sins. Sacrifices acceptable to God under the new covenant include praise and worship (Rom. 12:1–2; Heb. 13:15; 1 Pet. 2:5, 9), good works and sharing (Heb. 13:16), and material or financial gifts (Phil. 4:18).

Sacrifice in Israelite Worship

by

Sacrifices were a part of the tribute the Israelite worshiper offered to the God of the covenant. The Pentateuch goes into great detail concerning the altar and the sanctuary as the setting for sacrifice and the various types of sacrifices that were enacted in the worship of Israel.

Purposes of Sacrifice

In biblical times, sacrifice often accompanied the making of covenants, as in the cases of Noah (Gen. 8:20–9:17), Abram (Gen. 15:1–21), Isaac (Gen. 26:24–25), Jacob (Gen. 31:43–55; 35:6–12), and Moses on behalf of Israel (Exod. 24:1–8). Sacrifice was also a means of receiving direction from God; military leaders sometimes sacrificed to the Lord before inquiring whether they should go into battle, and Balaam offered a series of sacrifices to the Lord in order to determine whether he might pronounce a curse on Israel (Num. 23:1–30). Upon ascending the throne, Solomon offered extensive sacrifices at the tabernacle in Gibeon that he might receive the Lord’s guidance and wisdom to rule over Israel (2 Chron. 1:5–13). People also brought sacrificial offerings for purposes of thanksgiving, supplication, and atonement. Job was said to have made sacrifices on behalf of his children in case they had sinned against the Lord (Job 1:5).

Although grain, wine, and other foodstuffs were used in some offerings, the primary sacrifice was an unblemished animal. This was the only acceptable offering if the sacrifice were to atone for sin and may explain why the Lord refused Cain’s offering of produce but accepted the lamb brought by Abel (Gen. 4:3–4). Noah offered clean animals as burnt offerings after the Flood (Gen. 8:20); it is interesting that he differentiated between clean and unclean beasts even at this early period, before the law of Moses was given.

Sacrificial Altars

The altar, as the place where sacrifice was offered, occupied a focal position in Israelite worship. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob built altars to the Lord and made sacrifices, at which times it is often said that they “called upon the name of the Lord” (Gen. 12:8; 13:4; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1). An altar could be built of earth or stones, but if stones were used they were to be rough and uncut (Exod. 20:25; Josh. 8:31). An altar built on behalf of the entire nation, as in the case of Elijah’s altar on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18:30–32), was often constructed of twelve stones, representing the Israelite tribes. Unlike pagan altars of the same period, no altar used by Israel was to have steps up to it; the omission was to prevent the priest and worshiper from inadvertently exposing themselves to the altar as they approached it (Exod. 20:26).

The Mosaic Tabernacle From the giving of the Sinai covenant, the tabernacle or tent (’ohel), also called the “dwelling” (mishkan), was the central place of sacrifice for Israel; its functions were transferred to the temple or “house of the Lord” after its construction under Solomon. Both tabernacle and temple featured a three-stage approach to the presence of the Lord: the outer court surrounded the sanctuary proper, or Holy Place (miqdash, qodesh), which in turn led to the Holy of Holies, or inner sanctuary.

The Altar. The altar of burnt offering stood just within the entrance to the tabernacle courtyard. It was seven and one-half feet square and four and one-half feet high, constructed of acacia wood covered with brass, with a protruding horn at each corner. On this altar the priests burned the atonement offerings prescribed in the law of Moses. The altar of burnt offering was the first object a worshiper encountered when coming to the tabernacle; its prominent position was a reminder that sin must be dealt with as a matter of first priority.

The Sanctuary and Its Furnishings. Beyond the altar of burnt offering stood the laver, where the priests, who alone were allowed access to the tabernacle proper, washed both hands and feet before entering. The tabernacle structure itself was divided by a heavy, embroidered curtain into two rooms, the Holy Place, or sanctuary, and the Most Holy Place, or Holy of Holies. The sanctuary contained a seven-branched lamp made of gold, a golden table that held the consecrated bread for the priests, and the altar of incense, smaller by far than the brass altar outside and made of acacia wood covered with gold. At specified hours each morning and evening a specially prepared incense was burned on this altar, symbolizing the prayers of the covenant people to Yahweh.

The Holy of Holies. On the other side of the curtain, in the Most Holy Place, the ark of the covenant resided. This small, gold-covered box, with two fierce-looking cherubim guarding its cover, was the place where Yahweh met with Israel, and it symbolized the throne from which he ruled. Entry into the Most Holy Place was restricted to the high priest, who went in only once each year on the Day of Atonement.

Covenant Requirements of Sacrifice

When Yahweh granted his covenant with Israel on Mount Sinai, he gave detailed instructions for the sacrifices that were to be a part of the nation’s covenant responsibility as acts of tribute to the great King. These instructions included provisions for general sacrifices, sacrifices for consecration, and special festival sacrifices.

General Sacrifices. The law given to Moses mandated a variety of sacrifices. In sin offerings and guilt offerings, the blood of the slain animal was sprinkled on the altar to atone for the sin of the worshiper (Lev. 6:24–30; 7:1–6). Peace offerings were of either animals or grain; the worshiper brought these offerings on a voluntary basis as a thanksgiving or for other personal reasons (Lev. 5:14–17; 7:11–36). Whole burnt offerings were eaten by neither the priests nor the worshiper but were burned in their entirety on the altar (Lev. 3:1–17). Unlike pagan nations, which viewed sacrifices as food for the gods, Israel understood that Yahweh received only their “soothing aroma” (Num. 28:2 nasb). Offerings were brought in various combinations for the acts of cleansing required by the law, such as a woman’s purification after childbirth, recovery from certain diseases, and contact with unclean objects or dead bodies. Other sacrifices made restitution for trespasses against one’s fellow Israelites or for inadvertent legal infractions. A man who had completed a Nazirite vow was also to offer a sacrifice. The law specified that particular sacrifices, consisting of a burnt offering along with flour and wine, be made twice daily on behalf of the whole nation. These were doubled on the Sabbath and were always made in addition to sacrifices for special occasions.

Sacrifices for Consecration. The consecration of priests and holy objects also required sacrificing animals and applying the blood to the person or thing being sanctified. After the tabernacle had been completed, Aaron and his sons were cleansed and made holy in this way before assuming the priesthood. The tabernacle itself and all its furnishings were likewise sprinkled with blood before they were fit to be used in the worship of Yahweh.

Festival Sacrifices. The Mosaic laws established three major annual festivals, all of which involved the presentation of sacrifices: Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles, which included the Feast of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement. Specified portions of the offerings of wine, grain, oil, and flesh were given to the priests; internal organs and fat were burned on the altar as a sweet odor to the Lord; and the rest was usually returned to the worshipers as food for themselves and their families. This was particularly true of Passover, the feast that commemorated Israel’s deliverance from Egyptian slavery. Passover was essentially a covenant meal, celebrating the event of the exodus from Egypt, which had established Israel as the Lord’s covenant people. Hence, when the worshiper received back the sacrifice he had given, this was a picture of the Lord hosting his people at his own table and of their participation with him in a reaffirmation of the covenant.

Sacrifice and Atonement

In Israel’s worship, the link between sacrifice and atonement for sin is most clearly seen in the ceremonies associated with the Day of Atonement. On this day each year, the high priest was to enter the inner sanctuary bearing the blood of the sacrifice from the brass altar outside. Sprinkling the blood on the lid of the ark of the covenant, he made atonement for the entire nation. Kapporet, the Hebrew word for the lid that covered the ark, also carries the meaning of atonement or propitiation, in the sense of “covering.” The blood atoned for Israel’s sin by symbolically covering the kapporet so the Lord could no longer see it. Yahweh’s forgiveness was mediated; the sin did not cease to exist, but God refused to look at it or allow it to disrupt his relationship with the covenant nation. “Blessed is he whose transgressions are forgiven,” writes David, “whose sins are covered” (Ps. 32:1). When the principle of parallelism is applied to this verse it is clear that the two phrases are the same: one’s transgression is forgiven when the sin is covered.

It is also true that under Mosaic law the worshipers, mindful of their sin, understood the sacrificed animal as a substitution for their own lives. Because all sin was a violation of God’s law, any transgression was a sin against the Lord himself and punishable by death. Violators could be forgiven only if a death occurred, either their own or that of a substitute. From the Christian point of view, the sacrifices of the tabernacle and temple could not really take away sin (Heb. 10:4); the entire Mosaic sacrificial system is an extended picture of the true atonement that was to come in Jesus, the Lamb of God.

Local and Family Sacrifices

The concept of sacrifice extended beyond the centralized rituals of the Mosaic sanctuary. Apparently the building of altars as acts of personal or family devotion was an accepted practice in Israel, even when the tabernacle was in place with its complement of priests and Levites, who were designated to officiate at sacrificial rituals. Joshua sacrificed to the Lord after the unfortunate episode with Achan and the subsequent victory at Ai (Josh. 8:30–31). The men of Israel built an altar at Mizpah after punishing the tribe of Benjamin (Judg. 21:4). Samuel prepared a sacrifice for the people at Ramah (1 Sam. 7:17). David’s family made sacrifice at the new moon, as did the court of Saul (1 Sam. 20:18–29), although new moon festivals were observed with special sacrificial offerings at the tabernacle site. Despite the Law’s mandate of one sanctuary for the worship of Yahweh (Deut. 12:5; 16:16), these acts are not condemned, as is the continued worship at the various “high places” (1 Kings 22:43; 2 Kings 15:4; and others), probably because they did not pretend to be rites that rivaled those of the central sanctuary.

Davidic Worship and the Sacrifice of Praise

After David became king he installed the ark of the covenant in a tent in Zion. The tabernacle with its daily round of sacrifices was located several miles away in Gibeon, but the Most Holy Place was apparently empty for more than sixty years. The Bible does not tell us what the high priest did on the Day of Atonement when he carried the blood from the altar into the sanctuary, which no longer housed the ark. It does provide a description, however, of the worship activities that were carried on before the ark in David’s tent. Except for the celebration at its initial installation, there is no reference to burnt offerings being made before the ark in Zion; instead the picture is of teams of worshipers singing, dancing, playing instruments, and prophesying in rotating shifts, day and night (1 Chron. 16:1–38; 25:1–8). This is apparently what both the psalmist and the writer of Hebrews have in mind when they speak of the sacrifice of praise or thanksgiving, the fruit of lips that give thanks to the name of the Lord (Pss. 107:22; 116:17; Heb. 13:15).

Neglect and Restoration of Sacrifice

After Solomon built the first temple in Jerusalem, the ark was returned to the inner sanctuary and the altar of burnt offering moved to the temple courtyard. Eventually this temple was destroyed and rebuilt and then destroyed again. During periods of apostasy in Israel the sacrifices to Yahweh were neglected; in times of reform they were reinstituted. At the time of the birth of Christ, Herod’s temple was being built in Jerusalem, and it was to this structure that Jesus was carried when his mother brought sacrifices for her purification according to the law. There is no record that Jesus participated in sacrificial rituals, although he did attend more than one national feast in Jerusalem and ate the Passover lamb with his disciples.

Symbolic Objects in Biblical Worship

by

Together with symbolic actions and structures, biblical worship incorporates symbolic objects. Sometimes these are real objects, physically present in the place of worship. Sometimes they are verbal symbols of things not physically present. And sometimes they are both, either at the same time or at different times. Such objects include the ark of the covenant, books and scrolls, anointing oil, the lamp, incense, blood, the bread and cup, and the cross.

Ark of the Covenant

One of the most important and powerful symbols in the worship of Israel was the small, gold-covered box crowned with the fearsome cherubim. Beneath its golden cover were two stone tablets on which the Lord himself had written the covenant text, the Ten Commandments. These tablets were themselves symbols of the covenant and all that pertained to it—the stipulations and sanctions, the moral code by which it was lived out, and the system of sacrificial worship it required.

The Atonement Cover and Cherubim. The top of the ark was a lid or cover, sometimes called in English the “mercy seat,” or atonement cover, because it played a role in the symbolic acts of the Day of Atonement. On either side of the atonement cover, and made of one piece with it, were cherubim, overlaid with gold, with wings outstretched and faces turned inward toward the ark. When the ark was moved to Solomon’s temple it sat beneath a second pair of cherubim, making a total of four. These are the same living creatures that appear in Ezekiel’s vision of the glory of the Lord (Ezek. 1:5–11) and in John’s Revelation, in which they surround the throne of God (Rev. 4:6–7). Thus, although there were visual cherubim in the temple of Solomon, they became a verbal symbol in later worship.

In ancient sculpture, cherubim sometimes appear next to royal thrones; apparently these composite creatures symbolized the power of the king whose throne they guarded. For Israel, the ark of the covenant was the footstool of Yahweh’s throne (1 Chron. 28:2; Pss. 99:5; 132:7); the throne itself was invisible, held aloft by the cherubim (Ezek. 10:1). The “glory” or weight of the Lord (another verbal symbol of his awesome presence) rested on it, between the wings of the cherubim (2 Sam. 6:2; Ps. 99:1); there he dwelt in the midst of his people and reigned over them.

Movements of the Ark. The ark, together with the manifestations of the Lord’s glory, in cloud by day and fire by night, led the Israelites during their trek through the wilderness (Num. 10:33–36). The ark also led Israel’s crossing of the Jordan into the land Yahweh had promised them (Josh. 3:8–17). When Israel went to war, the ark was sometimes carried into battle ahead of the military units (1 Sam. 4:3); symbolically, Yahweh as Israel’s covenant king led his armies in warfare (1 Sam. 4:7–8). This practice ended after the ark was brought to Zion. However, scholars have theorized that the ark might sometimes have been carried in sacred procession at the festivals of Israel, as suggested by Psalms 24, 68, and 132.

The Heavenly Ark. Eventually the ark disappeared from the temple (Jer. 3:16). In Herod’s temple the Holy of Holies was empty, although sacrifices were carried on as if the throne of Yahweh were still there. The rending of the temple veil at the crucifixion of Jesus exposed this emptiness; the presence of the Lord no longer graced the old institution, with its ceremonies, animal sacrifices, and symbolic cleansings. Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God and Great High Priest, was about to enter the heavenly sanctuary with his own blood to offer it before the throne of God once for all people (Heb. 9:11–14; 10:10). John describes the scene thus:

Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and within his temple was seen the ark of his covenant. And there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake and a great hailstorm. (Rev. 11:19)

Thus the visible ark, which for centuries has symbolized the footstool of the throne of God in Israel’s worship, has been replaced by a word picture conveying the greater reality of its heavenly pattern, now sprinkled with the blood of Jesus, which he presented on that final Day of Atonement to which all the annual observances looked forward (Heb. 9:11–12; 10:1–10). The Lord God and the Lamb dwell in the new temple, the church of the firstborn (Heb. 12:23), of which the old was a symbol (1 Cor. 3:16–17; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:22). “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us” (John 1:14).

Books and Scrolls

In ancient times political agreements were inscribed on clay or stone tablets, or sometimes on papyrus, as a record of the treaty. These covenant texts were then deposited in the shrine of the god(s), whose duty it was to witness the oath and to enforce its stipulations. When Israel entered into a political treaty with Yahweh, Moses deposited a copy of the text at the shrine of Yahweh, the ark of the covenant. The ark in turn was housed first in the tabernacle of Moses, then in David’s tent, and finally in the temple of Solomon.

The Book of the Covenant. Originally the text of the treaty between Yahweh and Israel was written on stone tablets, which Moses brought down from his encounter with the Lord on Mount Sinai. Later, however, the law, or covenant text, was recorded on a scroll. (Books in Scripture are always scrolls; the modern form of the book, known as the codex, was not used in the biblical period.) This book was known variously as the Book of the Covenant, the Book of the Law (or simply “the Law”), and the Book of the Testimony (or simply “the Testimony”). References to the “Book of Life” are probably to this document as well. The covenant was the structure through which Israel related to the Lord, and the written text was emblematic of that relationship. This explains Moses’ breaking of the stone tablets on which the covenant was written when he witnessed Israel’s idolatry; the action betokened what had happened to the covenant itself. The kings of Judah, like David, who had founded their dynasty, were considered mediators of the covenant on behalf of the people. In what may have been a typical coronation ceremony, the child king Joash was presented with the Book of the Law when he was enthroned (2 Kings 11:12). During the religious reforms under Josiah, the forgotten Book of the Law was found during temple renovations and was immediately brought to the king (2 Chron. 34:16).

The Book of Life. In ancient covenants, the “great king” granting the treaty was sometimes said to have “created” the servant nation, his treaty partner. Since a created thing was not thought to exist until it was named, the great king often renamed the servant people, sometimes giving them his own name as a sign of ownership. The covenant text, then, was the guarantee of the people’s existence. When their names were inscribed in it, they had an identity. If the covenant were broken, however, their names were expunged and they no longer enjoyed the legal and military protection of the great king. Moses intercedes for wayward Israel saying: “Please forgive their sin—but if not, then blot me out of the book you have written” (Exod. 32:32). The Lord responds that he will blot out those who have sinned (Exod. 32:33–34). The result was death for the offenders, who could no longer remain among the covenant people whose names were recorded in the book. The same concept appears in the New Testament, where the symbolic “Book of Life” (Phil. 4:3; Rev. 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:15; 21:27) contains the names of those who are in covenant with the Lord God and the Lamb.

Scrolls of Curses. Zechariah sees a flying scroll with curses written on both sides. The scroll is being sent to those who break the covenant by lying or by swearing falsely and will avenge these violations (Zech. 5:1–2). In a vision Ezekiel is given a book containing the covenant curses and told to eat it so the words will be in his mouth and he can speak them to the house of Israel (Ezek. 2:9–3:4). The book was as sweet as honey on his tongue because it was the covenant with Yahweh, but it became bitter in his stomach because he tasted the curses he was commissioned to announce to the unfaithful nation.

John relates a similar experience in his Revelation. He sees a book in the hand of the one sitting on the throne. This is also the book of the covenant curses, as the events that follow make clear. The scroll is sealed with seven seals and no one is found worthy to open it; only the slain but victorious Lamb, as mediator of the new covenant and redeemer of his people, is able to unseal it (Rev. 5:1–10). Later in his vision John is given the book to eat. Like Ezekiel, he experiences it as sweet in his mouth and bitter in his stomach; the covenant is his delight but the curses concerning which he is to prophesy leave an unpleasant aftertaste (Rev. 10:1–11).

Although the text of Yahweh’s covenant with Israel includes stipulations for fulfilling the agreement and blessings for doing so, it appears that the pronouncement of curses on the unfaithful dominates in those biblical texts which refer to the Book or Scroll of the Covenant (Deut. 27:26; Gal. 3:10; cf. Rev. 22:18). Isaiah promises that when the new covenant is established those who have been deaf to the book will hear its words, and as a result their blind eyes will see. These afflicted “will rejoice in the Lord” (Isa. 29:19).

Anointing Oil

The land of Israel produced olive oil in abundance, reputed to have been the finest available in the ancient world. It was a staple of the economy and was sometimes used as a medium of exchange. When creditors threatened a widow of one of the prophets with selling her children as slaves, Elisha multiplied her last jar of oil so that she could pay her debts (2 Kings 4:1–7). Oil was valuable because it had many ordinary uses: it was burned in lamps to produce light, mixed with flour to produce bread, applied to the body as a cosmetic, and poured on wounds for healing. In addition to these pragmatic uses, oil was a part of the symbolic worship of Israel and is also mentioned in connection with practices in the New Testament church.

Oil in Israelite Worship. Jacob the patriarch poured oil over a stone to sanctify it as an altar, memorializing the place where God appeared to him in a dream (Gen. 28:10–19). The occasion was the Lord’s affirmation that the covenant he had made with Abraham and Isaac was now being extended to include Jacob. At this point in his life Jacob probably did not realize the full significance of God’s announcement, but to a young man who has deceived his father and has been sent away from home to escape an angry brother, the blessing of the Lord was an event of major importance.

The seven-branched lampstand that lit the sanctuary burned olive oil. As a part of the covenant worship instructions, Moses was told by the Lord to make a perfumed anointing oil using myrrh, cinnamon, cane, and cassia; this fragrant oil was sprinkled on the priests and their clothing and the tabernacle with all its furnishings to consecrate them and was not to be used for any other purpose. Pure olive oil was offered with flour as a part of some of the offerings made by fire to the Lord (Lev. 2:1, 4–6, 15; 14:10). When the offering was for cleansing from a disease, oil was also sprinkled before the Lord and put on the head of the diseased person “to make atonement for him before the Lord” (Lev. 14:29).

Oil and Commissioning. In the Old Testament, oil is a symbol of the special commission given by Yahweh to persons in public service. The high priest was consecrated with oil (Num. 35:25; Ps. 133:2). Prophets and kings were set apart for their special offices by anointing and were called “the Lord’s anointed” or “oiled one” (mashi‡ḥ, 1 Sam. 16:6; 24:6, 10; 2 Sam. 23:1). In recognition that their commissioning was from the Lord, Samuel poured oil on the heads of both Saul (1 Sam. 10:1) and David (1 Sam. 16:1, 13) when the Lord chose them to be kings of Israel, but David testified that it was truly the Lord who had anointed him (Ps. 23:5). Jesus’ very title “the Christ” (Christos, Acts 4:26) is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew “messiah” (mashi‡ḥ), “the one anointed with oil.” As Peter is praying after having been released by the Jewish religious leaders, he calls Jesus the holy Servant of God whom God had anointed (Acts 4:27).

Oil and the Holy Spirit. Elijah was told to anoint Elisha to succeed him as prophet (1 Kings 19:16); however, there is no record that he actually did so. Instead, Elijah’s mantle or cloak fell upon the younger prophet when a flaming chariot of the Lord’s presence separated the two men and Elijah was taken to heaven in a whirlwind. Elisha had requested a double portion of Elijah’s spirit, which was, of course, the Spirit of the Lord empowering the prophet. Elisha’s reqquest was granted when Elijah’s mantle fell to him. (2 Kings 2:11–14). This incident provides one link between anointing with oil and empowerment or anointing by the Holy Spirit. In the New Testament, a connection between oil and the Holy Spirit is amplified; it is with the Spirit, rather than with actual oil, that the Lord commissions those whom he has called for his special purposes. While preaching to the household of Cornelius, Peter declares that God “anointed [Jesus] with the Holy Spirit and with power” (Acts 10:38). John writes that believers are also anointed with the Holy Spirit:

As for you, the anointing you received from him [the Son] remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him. (1 John 2:27)

John is referring to Jesus’ promise that he would send the Spirit to teach his disciples all things (John 14:26). Paul also refers to the believers’ anointing and links it with the Holy Spirit (2 Cor. 1:21–22). Although the New Testament does not record anyone’s being anointed with actual oil as an act of commissioning, the New Testament writers understand anointing with oil as a word picture of blessing and empowerment by the Holy Spirit, no doubt directly associated with the baptism or filling of the Spirit as described in Acts 2:1–4 and elsewhere.

Oil and Healing. Jesus tells of a Samaritan who finds a robbed and beaten man beside the road, whose wounds he treats with wine and oil (Luke 10:33–34). These two substances were commonly used medicinally: wine cleansed and reduced infection while oil promoted healing. In the New Testament wine often symbolizes the cleansing of God’s people in the new covenant through the blood of Jesus, as in the institution of the Last Supper (Luke 22:20) and the marriage at Cana of Galilee (John 2:1–10). Oil speaks of God’s blessing through the Holy Spirit; when James instructs Christians who are sick to be anointed with oil by elders of the church (James 5:14), he is combining the symbolism of physical healing and the Spirit’s supernatural blessing.

The Lamp

In the sanctuary of Israel stood the golden lampstand with its seven lamps (Exod. 25:31–37), which were to burn continually (Lev. 24:2). The lampstand was not a “candlestick,” as in older English versions, but used olive oil. The lamps served a practical function in the house of the Lord, as in other houses, where the lack of windows rendered the interior quite dark even in the daytime. However, the lamp also has a symbolic significance in the Bible.

When the Psalms associate light with the Lord’s presence in the sanctuary, the image of the lampstand may be the background symbolism. Thus the psalmist cries out to the Lord to “send forth your light and your truth” to lead him to the house of God (Ps. 43:3). In the protective refuge of the holy place, “in your light we see light” (Ps. 36:9). Radiance, light, and shining are common scriptural images for the impact of the presence of the holy (Pss. 27:1; 50:2–3; 67:1; Matt. 17:2; 2 Cor. 4:6; 1 Tim. 6:16; Rev. 1:16). The lampstand, while not encompassing this imagery, is a part of it, especially as it is connected with the sanctuary.

The lamp is an element in the general biblical symbolism of light versus darkness, representing good versus evil, truth versus ignorance and falsehood. The Lord lights the lamp of the worshiper (Ps. 18:28; the variant in 2 Sam. 22:29 says, “You are my lamp, O Lord”). The lamp is a metaphor for the word of God, which gives direction to the faithful (Ps. 119:105). The spirit of man is called “the lamp of the Lord,” which illuminates a person’s inmost being (Prov 20:27; cf. John 1:4).

The lamp shares the association of olive oil with the Spirit of God, as in Zechariah’s vision of the lampstand and the two anointed ones (Zech. 4:1–6) and Jesus’ parable of the wise and foolish maidens (Matt. 25:1–13). This is most clearly seen in John’s vision of the throne of God, in which “Before the throne, seven lamps were blazing. These are the seven spirits of God” (Rev. 4:5). In John’s opening vision of the living Christ,he beholds him standing amid seven lampstands (Rev. 1:12–13), which represent the seven churches (Rev. 1:20). Since the number seven is symbolic of the covenant (being the root of the expression “swear an oath”), the seven lamps or lampstands are emblematic of the bond between the Lord and the people who are his witnesses. Thus Jesus compares the people of the kingdom of God to lamps, not hidden under baskets, but placed on stands, giving light to all the world (Matt. 5:14–16) as he supremely is the Light of the World (John 1:9; 8:12; 9:5).

Incense

The offering of incense in worship has its roots in antiquity. It was a common custom among the pagan peoples living in the vicinity of Israel, who burned incense to the moon, called the “queen of heaven,” and to various other gods (1 Kings 11:8; Jer. 44:17, 25). Those ancient peoples that sacrificed animals and grain to their gods did so in order to provide them with food. However, the Lord made it clear to Israel that he did not need their offerings in order to satisfy his hunger (Ps. 50:12–13), but accepted them as a sweet smell (Exod. 29:18; Num. 15:13). Accordingly, he gave Moses instructions to add fragrant incense to some of the grain offerings (Lev. 2:1–2, 15–16; 6:15; Num. 7:14) and to burn incense morning and evening in the Holy Place within the tabernacle (Exod. 30:7–8). Pure frankincense was put with the twelve cakes known as the “shewbread” or “bread of the presence” (Num. 4:7), which was laid on the golden table in the Holy Place.

On the Day of Atonement the high priest brought a pan of burning coals from the bronze altar into the Holy Place and poured two handfuls of sweet incense on the coals. The cloud formed by the burning incense covered the ark of the covenant, preventing the priest from seeing the mercy seat when he presented the blood and from dying as a result of looking on the glory of the Lord (Lev. 16:12–13). Only a priest who was descended from Aaron was allowed to offer incense to the Lord (Lev. 2:2). Violation of this restriction brought death to Korah and his company and a plague upon the people (Num. 16).

Malachi prophesies that incense will be offered “from the rising to the setting of the sun. In every place” (Mal. 1:11) to honor the great name of the Lord. This offering symbolizes the prayers of God’s people, which apparently accompanied it (Luke 1:10). David asks that the Lord will accept his prayer as the evening incense offering (Ps. 141:2), a symbol John repeats in his Revelation (Rev. 5:8; 8:3–4). In the early church, incense becomes a verbal symbol or word picture of prayer; Christian worship at this time does not include the literal offering of incense. In addition to prayer, the knowledge of Christ (2 Cor. 2:14) and a gift given to Paul (Phil. 4:18) are likened to the offering of incense.

Blood

In the Scripture, blood is a symbol of life (Gen. 9:4). While the spirit or breath is the life force, blood is the life substance. For this reason the Lord forbade Israel to eat or drink the blood of animals; it was to be poured out into the ground, symbolically returning it to God, who had given them life (Lev. 17:10–14). Because blood represents life, it was used for sanctification ceremonies in Israel’s rituals. Even before the law was given, while the Hebrews were still in Egypt, the Lord gave instructions for killing a lamb and smearing its blood over their doorways for protection. The blood “sanctified,” or set apart, the family within; the messenger of death recognized that the occupants of the house belonged to Yahweh and refrained from killing their firstborn (Exod. 12:13).

This same symbolism is at the heart of the various sprinklings of blood required by the Mosaic Law. A sacrifice made to the Lord was holy, or set apart, for him. Whatever touched it also became holy (Exod. 30:29). When the various altars, tables, utensils, and the tabernacle itself were sprinkled with the blood of the sacrifice, they were sanctified (Lev. 16:11–20). The covenant theme underlies this practice; those persons entering into covenant typically kill an animal and either sprinkle the blood on themselves or drink it as a way of identifying with the animal. The idea is that they will share the fate of the slain beast if they break the stipulations of the treaty. As worshipers of Yahweh, the people of Israel were prohibited from drinking blood; when they offered sacrifices the priest sprinkled the animal’s blood on them as an identification with the covenant, but they substituted drinking wine for drinking blood in the covenant meal. Being bound to Yahweh made Israel holy; since he is holy, all that belongs to him is holy as well (Lev. 11:44–45; Deut. 7:6, 14:2, 21; 26:19).

The author of Hebrews states that the blood of Jesus Christ is the blood of the new covenant. He is the Passover Lamb, sacrificed for the new covenant people. As the priest carried the blood of the sacrificed animal into the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement and sprinkled it on the cover of the ark, so Jesus, the High Priest and Mediator of the new covenant, entered the heavenly sanctuary with his own blood to make atonement for his people (Heb. 9:11–15; 10:29; 13:20).

Jesus said that those who eat his flesh and drink his blood will receive his life (John 6:54–56), a reference to the idea that blood is the life substance. When instituting the Lord’s Supper, he used wine to symbolize the shedding of his blood. Wine was known to be a cleansing agent in the case of flesh wounds (Luke 10:34), while blood was the Old Testament agent for spiritual cleansing (Heb. 9:22). Under the new covenant it is Jesus’ blood that provides cleansing for all who believe in him (1 Pet. 1:18–19; 1 John 1:7; Rev. 1:5), and that blood is symbolized by the wine of the Eucharist (Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25).

John visualizes the victorious Christ clothed in a “robe dipped in blood” (Rev. 19:13), while the great company of the redeemed are wearing garments that have been washed and made “white in the blood of the Lamb” (Rev. 7:14). Obviously the blood of Christ is a verbal, not a visual, symbol in New Testament usage; washing in literal blood would not make things white. Even the wine or grape juice of the Lord’s Supper is not important as a visual symbol of Jesus’ blood; it is the corporate action of partaking of the cup and the loaf that conveys the meaning of the ordinance as the covenant meal and the emblem of cleansing.

Bread and Cup

Both bread, or the loaf, and the cup are biblical symbols having several meanings. When combined, as the emblems of the Lord’s Supper, they take on additional significance in Christian worship.

Bread and Life. Bread, which in the Bible often stands for all food, is a symbol for the Word of God, and by extension, for the covenant relationship it governs and the life that flows from the covenant. In the Lord’s name, Isaiah appeals to Israel to “eat what is good,” the true bread of the “everlasting covenant” (Isa. 55:2–3). Moses compared the Word of the Lord to bread as the true basis for life in the covenant (Deut. 8:3); his words are quoted by Jesus in resisting the tempter (Matt. 4:4). In speaking of bread, Moses was referring to the manna that fell during Israel’s wanderings, by which the people were miraculously fed in a barren wilderness. Jesus also mentions the manna, contrasting it with himself as the “Bread of Life,” or living bread (John 6:49–51). This discourse of Jesus is filled with overlapping symbols: the manna is a token of the “true bread out of heaven,” yet the bread represents Jesus’ flesh, which he gives in dying that the world might live (John 6:32–33, 51). The discourse is occasioned by the feeding of the multitude, in which Jesus “gave thanks”; John pointedly records this twice (John 6:11, 23), suggesting that the entire chapter is an interpretation of the Eucharist. (Mention of the impending Passover celebration in the introduction to the account [John 6:4] reinforces this hypothesis.) Yet, in the end, it is neither the manna, nor the bread, nor his flesh, nor any ceremonial act that Jesus has in mind, but a spiritual reality symbols can only suggest: “the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life” (John 6:63).

Bread of the Presence (Shewbread). In the sanctuary, the “bread of the presence,” or shewbread (leḥem panim, literally “bread of face”), was to be set out on a table before the Lord at all times (Exod. 25:30), being replaced each Sabbath. Since there were twelve loaves, placed with frankincense as a “memorial,” the bread may have been symbolic of the continual covenant between Yahweh and Israel. The bread of the presence was sacrosanct, and only the priests could eat it (Lev. 24:9; 1 Sam. 21:4). However, David and his soldiers, being in a consecrated state, were allowed to eat it when no other food was available (1 Sam. 21:6). Jesus cites this incident to prove to the Pharisees that the institutions of Israel’s religion, especially the Sabbath, were created to benefit the people of God and not to bind them (Mark 2:25–28).

Unleavened Bread. The unleavened bread eaten during the observance of the Passover (Exod. 12:15–30; 13:3–7) is a reminder of the Exodus from Egypt and especially of the haste in which the Israelites had to depart, there being no time on the journey to allow the dough to rise before baking (Exod. 12:39). As a memorial of the Lord’s mighty act of deliverance, through which he created a people for himself (Exod. 19:4), the unleavened bread and the entire Passover are a covenant meal, celebrating the relationship God has decreed with his sons and daughters. The Lord’s Supper transfers the same symbolism to the new covenant as Jesus relates the bread to his body given in death to enact it (Luke 22:19). Although some interpreters, in administering the Lord’s Supper, have associated the striped appearance of modern commercial matzah with Isaiah’s words, “with his stripes we are healed” (Isa. 53:5 kjv), there is no scriptural evidence that the unleavened bread had this appearance or that the Lord’s Supper was associated with physical healing.

The Bread of Communion. Paul, writing of the Lord’s Supper, refers to the broken bread as “a koinōnia in the body of Christ” (1 Cor. 10:16). The term koinōnia, sometimes translated “fellowship” or “sharing,” indicates mutual participation at a more than superficial level. The broken loaf symbolizes an inward communion in the body of Christ, both his body on the cross in death and his body the church: “we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf” (1 Cor. 10:17). Not only is the loaf an inadequate symbol of this communion, but the word koinōnia and its English equivalents cannot really encompass it; the unity of Christ’s body, as energized by the Spirit of the living Lord, is a numinous reality that must be apprehended intuitively through corporate worship and the deeper bonding of covenanted lives.

The Cup of Wrath. Symbolism of the cup in Scripture includes the negative symbolism of God’s wrath and judgment on the unfaithful; yet even this is relevant to worship, since biblical worship celebrates the covenant and employs its structure. The prophet Jeremiah is told to take from the Lord’s hand the “cup filled with the wine of my wrath” and administer it to the disobedient nations of the world, including Jerusalem and Judah (Jer. 25:15–18). Ezekiel also proclaims the judgment of the Lord God against the harlot sister nations of Israel and Judah, using the figure of “the cup of ruin and desolation” (Ezek. 23:31–34). The background for such language is the use of cup symbolism in the sanctions of ancient treaties; one of the curses pronounced on the traitor is that he must drink the cup of poison (a practice with which we are familiar from Plato’s account of the death of Socrates). As the Judge, God administers his poison cup to the wicked of the land (Ps. 75:8), the prideful who refuse to recognize his sovereignty (Ps. 75:4–5; cf. Ps. 11:6). When Jesus prays in the Garden of Gethsemane, “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me” (Luke 22:42), he is referring to the penalty for unfaithfulness to the covenant that he himself is to bear on the cross that others might be released from its curse (cf. Gal. 3:13).

The Cup of Blessing. The cup is also, of course, a positive symbol of fellowship with the Lord and of his blessing. David celebrates the abundance of Yahweh his Shepherd in singing, “My cup overflows. Surely goodness and love [ḥesed] will follow me all the days of my life” (Ps. 23:5–6). In Psalm 16 he testifies, “Lord, you have assigned me my portion and my cup” (Ps. 16:5), perhaps in contrast to the libations, or drink offerings, of those who have exchanged Yahweh for another god (Ps. 16:4). Such a libation offered to Yahweh may be intended in Psalm 116:13, in which the speaker says, “I will lift up the cup of salvation and call on the name of the Lord,” in fulfillment of a vow. In ancient Jewish custom, a meal was concluded by a prayer of thanksgiving over a cup of wine, called the “cup of blessing”; Paul borrows this phrase in describing the cup of the Lord’s Supper: “Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing [koinōnia] in the blood of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16 nasb). Like the common loaf, the cup of the Eucharist is a token of a deeper communion in the death of Christ, symbolized by his blood.

Eucharistic Symbols: The Bread and the Cup. The bread and the cup together are the visual tokens of the Lord’s Supper, physical objects that do not stand in isolation but are part of a larger whole, a corporate act of worship that is the real sacramental symbol. It is significant that in the New Testament accounts of the institution of the Last Supper it is not the wine but the cup of which Jesus speaks. Had he spoken of the wine itself, the focus would be on the substance, a visual representation of his literal blood. In focusing on the cup, Jesus calls attention instead to the action by which his assembled worshipers are to memorialize and represent his death. The bread, which bore less resemblance to his physical body, could be mentioned directly without compromising the deeper symbolism intended. When the second-century church began to produce visual symbols, one of the favorite motifs in catacomb frescoes was the symbol of the Eucharist; typically it took the form, not of the loaf and cup, but of the loaves and fish of the feeding of the multitude (John 6:4–14), with the chalice of wine sometimes faintly visible in the background (Walter Lowrie, Art in the Early Church, 2nd ed. [New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1965], plate 13).

The Cross

The church did not use the cross as a visual symbol until around the fifth century a.d. In the New Testament, the cross is a physical object, the instrument of Jesus’ execution. But it is also a word picture in apostolic teaching, and Jesus spoke of it symbolically.

Appearance of the Cross. The shape of the cross on which Jesus died is unknown. The Greek word stauros indicates the instrument of crucifixion but not necessarily the arrangement of “crossed” wooden beams that has become familiar from later Christian art, the so-called Latin cross. Although the Romans may have used crosses in this form, crucifixion was usually on a simple vertical stake without a cross arm. Several New Testament passages speak of Christ’s death on a “tree” (xulon, Acts 5:30; Gal. 3:13; 1 Pet. 2:24) in fulfillment of Deuteronomy 21:22, suggesting a wooden stake.

Use of the cross as a visual symbol originated in paganism; it is found throughout the ancient world in cultures that preceded the Christian era. A common cross in the eastern Mediterranean world was that used in the worship of the god Tammuz. The symbol of Tammuz was the initial letter of his name, the Greek letter tau, shaped like a “T,” with a circle over it representing the sun. Along with many pagan symbols and customs, the “T” cross and other cross symbols eventually passed into Christian usage, introducing the horizontal arm.

The Cross As Instrument of Execution. Roman officials used the cross as a means of execution in certain cases. An especially cruel method of torture and punishment, crucifixion was the penalty for acts of rebellion against authority, such as the revolt of slaves or of subject nations. The victim hung on the cross might linger for several days, alternating between periods of half-consciousness and agonizing pain. Josephus, the Jewish historian who deserted to the Romans during the revolt of a.d. 66–70, tells of encountering several of his friends, crucified, while traveling with the Roman commander; at his request the men were taken down, and some survived. The Jewish method of capital punishment was not crucifixion but stoning; however, the apostolic preaching of Acts holds the Jewish authorities ultimately responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus, with the Romans as their willing agents (Acts 2:23, 36; 3:13–15; 4:10).

Jesus’ Use of the Symbolism of the Cross. In the discourse recorded in Matthew 16:21–28, Jesus predicted his own suffering at the hands of the religious establishment. When Peter protested, Jesus replied, “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me” (Matt. 16:24). In this imagery, the “cross” does not mean trials and problems in general, but persecution for the sake of the kingdom of God, as the context of Jesus’ words makes clear. The cross is emblematic of the truth that one must “lose his life” in the present order of things in order to gain it in the new order to come (Matt. 16:25–26). Those entering the new order are considered traitors to the old institutions and are made the objects of abuse, a theme found elsewhere in Jesus’ teaching (for example, Matt. 5:10–12; John 15:18–20) and throughout the New Testament. The author of Hebrews, for instance, reminds his readers that Jesus “suffered outside the city gate,” adding, “let us, then, go out to him outside the camp, bearing the disgrace he bore” (Heb. 13:12–13). According to Jesus, the new kingdom is to make its appearance while some of those hearing his words are still living (Matt. 16:27–28), suggesting that the events of a.d. 70, the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, are pivotal. At that time the victory of the one crucified will be manifest, and the persecuted of the new order will prevail over their persecutors of the old.

The Cross in Apostolic Teaching. Thus, in the proclamation and teaching of the apostles, the cross stands not only for Jesus’ suffering, but also for his triumph over the forces opposed to the kingdom of God. Paul, in a remarkable turnabout of symbolism, declares that it is Jesus who nails to the cross “the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us and which was hostile to us”; in the cross, Jesus exposed and disarmed the “rulers and authorities” of the old system which had held people captive “through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men” (Col. 2:8–15 nasb). The powers of the old order, “the rulers of this age, who are passing away,” were defeated when they “crucified the Lord of glory” (1 Cor. 2:6–8 nasb). It is not the cross, but the identity of the one crucified, which is the crucial factor. In taking upon himself the curse of the old covenant (Gal. 3:13), the Son of God cancelled its effect, making it possible for both Jew and Gentile to enter the new covenant by faith (Gal. 3:22). “By making peace through his blood shed on the cross,” Jesus has reconciled all people to God the Father (Col. 1:19–22). The cross of Christ, then, is his victory, one reality with his resurrection and exaltation, all summed up in Jesus’ words: “But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself” (John 12:32, italics added).

The preaching of the cross is an offense. The image of an instrument of torture is not a pretty one, nor is the message of the cross the clever and entertaining speech of the polished orator. To the world it is offensive and foolish (1 Cor. 1:17–23). But this is exactly the potency of the cross as a verbal image. As a mere image, the cross may degenerate into a decoration, a repetitive ornamental motif, or a magical talisman. In itself it is insignificant, unintelligible, even repulsive. As a true symbol, however, it can only direct beyond itself to the reality it represents, and that is its power.

Terms from Old Testament Worship Used to Interpret Christ

by

It is significant that the New Testament authors apply words and images from Israelite worship to Jesus Christ. In so doing, they show how the church sought to interpret Jesus, whom it recognized to be the Christ.

Jesus Christ, in his appearance as the incarnate Word of God, displayed a personal presence and power that moved people to an awed and worshipful response. When Jesus directed the Galilean fishermen to a miraculous catch, Peter fell at his feet, crying, “Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!” (Luke 5:8). As a woman suffering from a hemorrhage touched the hem of his garment and was healed, Jesus sensed that power had gone out from him; in fear and trembling the woman fell down before him (Mark 5:25–34). The soldiers who came to arrest Jesus “drew back and fell to the ground” when he spoke (John 18:6). The resurrection of Christ further verified his identity as the one appointed by God to fulfill his purpose in the redemption of his people. This left the apostles with the task of explaining the crucifixion as a part of the divine plan. To do this, they drew on the work of the prophets of Israel, especially the portrait of the “servant” of the Lord found in the later chapters of Isaiah; they also drew on the imagery and terminology associated with the festal and sacrificial cultus of the Hebrew sanctuary, including the concept of atonement.

Atonement Terminology

The idea of atonement relates to the need to be shielded from the wrath of a holy God, yet not in the moral sense alone (that God is good and man is evil); rather it is because God is God, the Creator, and the worshiper is a finite creature that the gap between them must be bridged by some atoning act. The Creator is of surpassing worth; in contrast, the worshiper is as nothing before him. Atonement is a “covering” (the basic meaning of the Hebrew kafar) that provides a cleansing or consecration for the worshiper, enabling him or her to enter the presence of God and to have fellowship with him. Thus, by sacrifice atonement is made for priests, the people, and even for the sanctuary and the altar (for example, Lev. 16) that the profane might venture to approach the sacred and serve God’s purposes. In another connection, a leper who is cleansed must have atonement made through the slaughter of a male lamb (Lev. 14:1–20). The concept of atonement defies rational explanation but belongs to the realm of the “numinous,” or suprarational, intuitively experienced aspects of the holy.

The word atonement is not found in the New Testament, although a suggestion of its basic meaning is found in Peter’s statement that “love covers over a multitude of sins” (1 Pet. 4:8). But the concept of atonement underlies the apostolic proclamation that “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3), and the New Testament theologians approach the mystery of the atonement using symbols drawn from Israelite worship. In this respect the apostles were following the example of Jesus himself, who had told them that the Son of Man had come “to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). The term lutron, “ransom,” relates to the Israelite concept of the redemption of the firstborn. The firstborn of clean animals were to be offered on the altar (Num. 18:17), but the firstborn of humans and of unclean animals were to be redeemed by a payment (Num. 18:15–16). As understood by the early Christians, however, the concept of ransom goes deeper, as a symbol interpreting the atonement of Christ.

Thus, in the New Testament, Christ’s death is called an offering or sacrifice; Hebrews calls his death “for all time one sacrifice [thusia] for sins” (Heb. 10:12), and Paul says that Christ “gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering [prosphora, something brought forward or presented] and sacrifice [thusia] to God” (Eph. 5:2), introducing also symbolism from the incense offerings of the Hebrew sanctuary. Paul’s declaration that God made Christ “who had no sin to be sin for us” (2 Cor. 5:21) also relates to the sacrificial rites; as applied to Christ, the word sin (hamartia) should be understood as “sin offering,” equivalent to the Hebrew ḥatta’t, the sacrifice that rehabilitates the worshiper after transgression. Hebrews elaborates on the concept of sacrifice as applied to the obedient death (under the figure of the “blood”) of Christ (Heb. 10:1–22) and also refers to our sanctification “through the offering [prosphora] of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Heb. 10:10 nasb); Christ is not only the sacrifice, but also the High Priest who offers it (Heb. 7:26–27).

The furnishings of the sanctuary also provide an image used to interpret the atoning death of Christ. In Romans 3:25, Paul refers to the redemption in Christ Jesus, “whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith” (nasb). The word translated “propitiation” or “means of expiation” is hilastērion; the Septuagint (the Greek version of the Old Testament) uses this term for the lid of the ark of the covenant (Exod. 25:16–22), on which the blood of the sin offering was sprinkled on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:14). The apostle John employs a related term in declaring that if anyone sins, Jesus Christ, our Advocate with the Father, is himself “the propitiation [hilasmos] for our sins” (1 John 2:2; 4:10 nasb); the Septuagint uses this word in the sense of “sin offering” or “atonement” (Num. 5:8; Ezek. 44:27).

Imagery of the Lamb

The idea of atonement for sin is only part of the Old Testament worship symbolism the early Christians used to interpret the death of Christ. In the context of a discussion of judgment of immorality within the church, Paul compares Christ to the Passover lamb (1 Cor. 5:7–8). The Passover lamb was not a sin offering but the meal signifying the Lord’s covenant with the people he was about to deliver in the Exodus from Egypt; the blood of the Passover lamb marks the household of the people of the Lord for their protection during the time of divine judgment (Exod. 12:1–13). Thus, Paul urges the Christian community to separate itself from the “leaven” of unrighteousness, for “Christ our Passover [pascha] also has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the feast [heortazō] … with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth (1 Cor. 5:7–8 nasb)” the crucified christ is the Lamb whose blood identifies the true covenant community in the face of the wrath about to fall on the unfaithful.

The writings of the apostle John also use the slain lamb of Israelite worship as a symbol interpreting the crucified Christ; uniquely in the Johannine writings, Jesus is directly called “the Lamb.” In the gospel of John, John the Baptizer testifies to Jesus as “the Lamb of God [ho amnos tou theou], who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29). However, the concept underlying this phrase does not seem to be atonement and sacrifice. It is noteworthy that in the Old Testament it was not a male lamb, but typically a bull, a ram, or a goat that was offered for sin (or, in the case of the scapegoat, driven away bearing the residual sin of the people, Lev. 16:20–22), yet the New Testament never likens Christ to any of these animals, but only to the lamb. How, then, does he “take away the sin of the world”? The thought seems to be that he does so through his victory over sin, in the utter obedience of his death on the cross. Christ’s obedience “to the point of death” is an important aspect of Paul’s Christology, but in Philippians 2:8 he relates it to Christ’s exaltation as Lord rather than to atonement for sin, just as the author of Hebrews relates Jesus’ endurance of the cross to his exaltation to the right hand of God (Heb. 12:2). In the same manner, the Revelation exclaims: “Worthy is the Lamb [arnion], who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and praise!” (Rev. 5:12). Here Christ appears as the victorious Lamb, reigning with the Father as “KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS” (Rev. 19:16). He takes away sin, not only by his offering of himself, but by his victory and dominion over evil as the “great King” who delivers his covenant people from their enemies. He takes away sin through the power of his life, dwelling as God himself in the midst of his people, the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:1–8). He takes away sin through the radiance of his presence, as the temple of the holy city and its light: “I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple [naos]. The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp [luchnos]” (Rev. 21:22–23). Here, through the figure of the Lamb, Christ is compared also to the lamp of the sanctuary.

Light and Glory

Imagery of light or radiance, so familiar from Israel’s worship of the Lord, is applied also to Jesus Christ in the New Testament. Jesus is the “light of the world” (to phōs tou kosmou, John 8:12), the “radiance [apaugasma] of God’s glory [doxa]” (Heb. 1:3). The apostles witness Jesus transfigured in brightness like the sun (Matt. 17:2); John beholds his face “like the sun shining in all its brilliance” (Rev. 1:16). New Testament witnesses affirm that in Christ we behold “the light of the knowledge of the glory [doxa] of God in the face of Christ” (2 Cor. 4:6 rsv), that “we have seen his glory [doxa], the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father” (John 1:14). As the glory of God, Christ is also “the image [eikōn] of the invisible God” (Col. 1:15 rsv), the “exact representation [charaktēr] of his being” (Heb. 1:3). This language originates in the festal worship of Israel, which centered in the theophany or manifestation of the Lord, as his glory [kavod] appeared to his people or filled the holy place. In the Sinai covenant, Yahweh descended on the mountain in fire (Exod. 19:18). In Israel’s subsequent worship of the Lord, which was a continual renewal of the covenant, his glory manifested itself, so that “from Zion, perfect in beauty, God shines forth” (Ps. 50:2). No image could be made of Yahweh, but his “glory,” the radiant envelope of his presence, was understood to be enthroned over the ark of the covenant. This concept further illuminates the application of the term hilastērion, “mercy seat,” to Jesus Christ, for the mercy seat was the place where Yahweh was to meet with his people, speaking to them “from between the two cherubim that are upon the ark of the testimony” (Exod. 25:22 rsv). As the triumphant Passover Lamb and as the representation of God’s glory, Christ maintains and defends the covenant between the Lord and his faithful people and is the Word (logos) through whom God speaks to his people (John 1:1, 14; 1 John 1:1; Rev. 19:13).

The Curse of the Covenant

Understanding the covenantal foundation of Israelite, and Christian, worship sheds light on another expression used by the apostle Paul, who declares, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse [katara] for us, for it is written: ‘Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree’ ” (Gal. 3:13). The biblical covenant is modeled on the ancient treaty, which included both stipulations and sanctions in the form of blessings if the covenant is maintained and curses that take effect if it is broken. In the Bible, the clearest example is Moses’ farewell sermon in Deuteronomy (Paul was quoting from Deut. 21:23 in the Galatians passage), a description of a covenant liturgy that closes with an extended ceremony of blessing and, especially, cursing (Deut. 27–28; 32–33). The curse element in the covenant liturgy was what generated the pronouncements of the prophets of Israel and Judah; in their declarations of judgment against the nation, they were announcing the outworking of the curse of the covenant as the consequence of its violation by an unfaithful people. Paul sees Christ, who died on the “tree,” as having borne this curse so that the covenant, broken by its original grantees, may now be renewed with the new “Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16) made up of both Jew and Gentile. Jesus understood his own death in this way, as is clear from his prayer in Gethsemane, when he asks the Father to “take this cup from me” (Luke 22:42). The cup of poison was one of the curses traditionally administered to covenant breakers; in his death, Jesus is to bear this curse on behalf of the unfaithful, that others might be set free to enter the kingdom of God. In the Revelation, John sees that in the new Jerusalem “no longer will there be any curse” (Rev. 22:3), for the Lamb receives the homage of the community of the new covenant.

Imagery Relating to Gentile Inclusion

The inclusion of Gentiles in the covenant, through the death of Christ, is the great “mystery” or now-revealed truth Paul celebrates (Eph. 3:3–7). In explaining this mystery, Paul uses additional terminology drawn from Old Testament worship.“He [Christ] himself is our peace [eirēnē], who has made the two one” (Eph. 2:14). In the Bible, peace (shalom) is that state of blessing and salvation which is the purpose and effect of the covenant, but one gets the impression here that, in speaking of Christ as our “peace,” Paul is thinking specifically of the peace offering (shelem), which in Israelite worship was a sacrifice that restored and maintained fellowship between the worshiper and the Lord. Both Jew and Gentile were condemned as “objects of wrath” under the old covenant (Eph. 2:3), the Gentiles as “foreigners to the covenants of the promise” (Eph. 2:12) and the Jews as disobedient (Eph. 2:3). But Christ in his death has reconciled both groups to God (Eph. 2:16), building them together into “a holy temple [naos],” “a dwelling of God in the Spirit” (Eph. 2:21–22 nasb). The image of the Israelite sanctuary as emblematic of the union of Jew and Gentile in Christ also occurs in the statement of James during the apostolic council recorded in Acts 15. Here the inclusion of Gentiles in the people of God is viewed as the fulfillment of Amos’s prophecy concerning the restoration of the booth, or tent (skēnē), of David (Acts 15:16–17; Amos 9:11); the tabernacle was the original tent that housed the ark after David had it brought to Zion and for which he directed continual prophetic, nonsacrificial worship as reflected throughout the book of Psalms (1 Chron. 15–16).

Sabbath Imagery

The epistle to the Hebrews employs the imagery of the Sabbath in interpreting the event of Jesus Christ. Whereas the disobedient and unbelieving are excluded from entering God’s rest (Heb. 3:18–19), “there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God” (Heb. 4:9 rsv). The thought seems to be that by his sacrifice of himself, Jesus the “Great High Priest” has become the Sabbath rest of the believer, who “rests from his own work, just as God did from his” (Heb. 4:10).

Conclusion

The New Testament thus applies much of the worship vocabulary of the Old Testament to its understanding of Jesus Christ and his new covenant community. But there is a new spirituality to the use of these terms; they are employed not to describe external acts or features of worship but as a means of grasping the inward significance of the event of Jesus Christ. As the writer of Hebrews says, “You have not come to a mountain that can be touched … But you have come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God … to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant” (Heb. 12:18, 22, 24). The same spirituality that infuses the Christians’ use of the terminology of Hebrew worship is now to transform their worship as well. In Jesus’ words to the woman of Samaria, the Father is to be worshiped “neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem” (John 4:21) but by genuine worshipers who “will worship the Father in spirit and truth” (John 4:23).

A Prayer of Atonement

by

Psalm 51 (NLT)
Have mercy on me, O God, because of your unfailing love.
Because of your great compassion, blot out the stain of my sins.
Wash me clean from my guilt.
Purify me from my sin.
For I recognize my shameful deeds–they haunt me day and night.
Against you, and you alone, have I sinned; I have done what is evil in your sight.
You will be proved right in what you say, and your judgment against me is just.
For I was born a sinner–yes, from the moment my mother conceived me.
But you desire honesty from the heart, so you can teach me to be wise in my inmost being.
Purify me from my sins, and I will be clean; wash me, and I will be whiter than snow.
Oh, give me back my joy again; you have broken me–now let me rejoice.
Don’t keep looking at my sins.
Remove the stain of my guilt.
Create in me a clean heart, O God.
Renew a right spirit within me.
Do not banish me from your presence, and don’t take your Holy Spirit from me.
Restore to me again the joy of your salvation, and make me willing to obey you.
Then I will teach your ways to sinners, and they will return to you.
Forgive me for shedding blood, O God who saves; then I will joyfully sing of your forgiveness.
Unseal my lips, O Lord, that I may praise you.
You would not be pleased with sacrifices, or I would bring them.
If I brought you a burnt offering, you would not accept it.
The sacrifice you want is a broken spirit.
A broken and repentant heart, O God, you will not despise.
Look with favor on Zion and help her; rebuild the walls of Jerusalem.
Then you will be pleased with worthy sacrifices and with our whole burnt offerings; and bulls will again be sacrificed on your altar.

A Theme to Remember:
Sometimes a terrible sin, like the adultery and murder David committed so he could be with Bathsheba, seems unpardonable. The only offense that will continue to stain our lives, however, is the one we fail to confess with a repentant heart so that it can be covered by the cleansing blood of the Savior.

Words to Remember:
In the cross, God descends to bear in his own heart the sins of the world. In Jesus, he atones at unimaginable cost to himself.
–Woodrow A. Geier