| Site menu |
|
 |
| Our poll |
|
|
| Statistics |
Total online: 5 Guests: 5 Users: 0 |
|
| Login form |
|
|
|
The LORD further institutes permanent, daily sacrifices. We aren't told
where the animals are to come from, but I would guess either donations
or some sort of national tax. Although it's not stated here, I believe
the priests also eat from the daily sacrifices (and not just the
sacrifices for their consecration), which will become their daily
provision while they minister by maintaining the lampstand and also
overseeing the sacrifices and other rituals.
We are not told what is the purpose or reason for these sacrifices, but I
would speculate that they are intended as a sacrifice of worship, not
atonement or consecration. We have seen a few sacrifices of worship
before, such as Gen 4:3-4 and arguably also Gen 22:13. In both
instances, there is no obvious sign that the men offering sacrifices are
atoning for anything, they are just offering sacrifices as a token or
respect or worship to God. I believe it's similar here because there is
nothing specifically being atoned. I believe this is partly the basis
for God's "dwell[ing] among the sons of Israel". Alternatively, one
could view it as sacrificial atonement for sins the Israelites commit on
a daily basis, in which case they would have daily atonement in
addition to the annual Passover festival.
However, I think there's a lingering question, which is, "why does a
sacrifice of worship make sense?" I already tried to address the
reasoning of substitutionary atonement back in Ex 12,
and I think I was able to find a sort of logic in the sense that one
can transfer one's sins to the animal and then kill the animal. In this
case, for the daily sacrifices, there is no apparent "transfer", so
what purpose does it serve that an animal die? I honestly don't have a
good answer for this, but I have some ideas. Back in Gen 4, we saw that
Cain offered of the fruit that he grew from the soil, while Abel
offered fat from the flocks he raised. In both cases, they offered food
which was the direct result of their labor. I think this represents
the duality between the results of labor and the food that we need to
eat to live. These two concepts are intertwined first in Gen 3 when God
says that it is by harsh labor that man shall bring plants from the
ground, which he shall eat. This is analogous to the harsh labor
required to shepherd a flock and eat the slaughtered lambs of that
flock. This further explains why there are sacrifices of bread and oil
(and in v. 40, wine) in addition to animals, because this represents the
approximate diet of the Hebrews. There was no sacrifice of bread in
the Passover or when the covenant is confirmed in Ex 24, because those
were sacrifices of atonement, while these are sacrifices of consecration
and worship.
Like the offering of firstfruits, I believe the sacrifices in this
chapter are intended as an acknowledgement that God is the source of all
the food we eat, that our success comes from God. God sends down rain
and causes the sun to shine, and provides us all the tools we need to
have a successful crop. Offering a sacrifice to God, then, shows that
we recognize our dependence on him and his favor towards us.
Does it take a sacrifice to acknowledge one's dependence on God? I'd
lean towards no, I don't think it does. I think the sacrifice here is
instituted in part to teach the Israelite's their dependence on
God, possibly more than as an acknowledgement. And why a sacrifice?
Probably the logic is, "from God this came, to God shall it return."
|
|
| Calendar |
| « January 2025 » | | Su | Mo | Tu | We | Th | Fr | Sa | | | | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
|
|
|
