The
Purposes of Sacrifices in the Kingdom
First, sacrifice will serve
to restore the individual Israelite to the theocracy of which he or she is a
part. Von Rad says:
Sin was thus an offense
against the sacral order . . . . But there was more to it still. Sin was also a
social category. Through ties of blood and common lot, the individual was
regarded as being so deeply embedded in the community that an offense on his
part was not just a private matter affecting only himself and his own
relationship to God . . . . The evil which an action had brought into existence
inevitably had effects which destroyed individual and community alike, unless
the latter solemnly and clearly cancelled its solidarity with the offender.
Thus, in an utterly realistic and direct sense, an offender was a danger to the
whole people. (Von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 2:264, 266)
Whitcomb also takes this
view of sacrifices in the millennium. Future animal sacrifices will be
efficacious and expiatory
only in terms of the strict provision for ceremonial (and thus temporal)
forgiveness within the theocracy of Israel. Thus, animal sacrifices during the
coming kingdom age will not be primarily memorial. (Whitcomb, p. 211)
This fact can be illustrated
from the impairment caused by sin in this community relationship in the Old
Testament. For example, if the consequences of sin were not removed, the
physical destruction of the sinner was inevitable (Lev. 26:14-39). The same
will be true in the millennium. Any outbreak of blatant sin will be punished by
physical death as Christ rules with a rod of iron (Ps. 2:9; 72:1-4; Isa. 11:4;
29:20-21; 65:20; 66:24; Zech. 14:16-21; Jer. 31:29-30). This function of
sacrifices in the future will have nothing to do with eternal salvation or the
forgiveness of sin before God but rather with the community adjustments within
the theocracy (this will be elucidated as the discussion progresses).
Second, it was seen in the
discussion of the meal and peace offerings that thanksgiving and worship were
part of the sacrifical system. There is no reason to think that this would not
continue to be an important function during the kingdom period as shown by
Ezekiel's many references to these seen in Chapter 4. Cave suggests that the
meal offering represented the "full dedication of one's material
possessions to God." Oesterly notes concerning the peace offering,
"just as the very fact of friends eating together effected a union between
them, so Yahweh, by coming into the sanctuary and joining the worshipers in the
sacrifical feast made them one with Himself." In addition, it was seen
that the burnt offering functioned in part to demonstrate one's complete
devotion to God. This also could be a function of the burnt offering during the
kingdom (see Chapter 4). Wood points out that it "symbolized complete consecration
of the life to God, being consumed entirely on the altar." These brief
examples demonstrate that there is nothing heretical in suggesting that
sacrifices will be reinstituted for there is nothing really "backward"
about the sacrifices, except that to the modern mind they are culturally
different.
A third reason for the
reinstitution of sacrifices during the future theocracy is the very important
fact that the divine presence will once again be dwelling in the land. As
argued earlier, impurity was contagious to both persons and sancta. Further, it
was inimical to Yawheh who would refuse to dwell among His people if
uncleanness remained untreated. Because God has promised to keep His presence
on earth during the millennium (the New Covenant) His withdrawal is not an
option. Therefore, it will be necessary to reinstitute sacrifices so that
judgment against impurity will not break out on earth. (Sacrifices will cease
following the millennial kingdom because in the eternal state, every individual
will be glorified, and there will therefore be no impurity, uncleanness, etc.)
Leviticus teaches that the purgation offering served primarily to purge the
sancta of uncleanness. Furthermore, Ezekiel has numerous references to the same
offering, and ascribes to it an identical function during the kingdom period.
Therefore, this offering will be reinstituted in order to purge the sancta so
that the divine presence will be protected.
A fourth function of renewed
sacrifice during the millennium will be the reparations made on the human level
as embodied in the reparation offering. This would preserve horizontal
relationships between persons within the theocracy.
A final suggestion for the
function of millennial sacrifices is that ceremonial cleansing will he made on
behalf of people for their uncleanness or inadvertent sin. It has already been
shown, for example, that a sin offering was required for ritual cleansing after
childbirth (Lev. 12:6-8), leprosy (Lev. 14:13-17), contact with the dead (Num.
6:11, 14) , or for those suffering from abscesses and hemorrhages (Lev. 15:15,
30). Again, this cleansing would be related to the guarding of the sanctifying
presence of the divine glory. It should also be kept in mind, that these items
have nothing to do with personal sin, but simply with the impure state
of the human race in an unglorified condition.
Each of these functions of
the sacrifices operates in a different sphere than does the cross of Christ.
There is no contradiction between the two, as there was not in the mind of
Jeremiah and Ezekiel. (This does not mean to imply that Jeremiah and Ezekiel
were necessarily thinking of Christ but simply shows that they did not ascribe
soteriological benefits to the sacrifices) (Jerry Michael Hullinger, "A
proposed solution to the problem of animal sacrifices in Ezekiel 40-48" [PhD
Dissertation; Dallas Theological Seminary, 1993], 150-54)
The offering of Christ with
its concomitant benefits transcends every dispensation, and is therefore
entirely sufficient for the purposes which God intended. However, when the
future theocracy is instituted, there will be a need for external cleansing due
to the glorious presence of God. Because the cross was not intended to deal
with these matters, it will be necessary to reinstitute the Levitical offenngs.
(Jerry Michael Hullinger, "A proposed solution to the problem of animal
sacrifices in Ezekiel 40-48" [PhD Dissertation; Dallas Theological
Seminary, 1993], 231)
It could again be objected
that this demeans the cross by putting a limitation on the blood of Christ.
This is not true. For example, when Christ was on earth, He did not heal
everyone in the Middle East who was sick even though He had the capability. He
sovereignly chose to limit His healing power. Likewise, God the Father has the
ability to effect salvation for every individual who has ever lived. However,
He has not chosen to do so. Yet this in no way limits His power, love or grace.
In the same manner, God conceiveably could have chosen that the blood of Christ
cleanse ceremonial and external defilements, but in His good pleasure He did
not.
When sacrifices are
reinstituted, they will serve to cleanse ceremonial defilement that would
offend the presence of a holy God. this manner. sacrifice of Christ
accomplished different things, there will be no tension when animal sacrifice
is reintroduced.
It is true that Paul offered
sacrifice in the temple when God's glory was not dwelling there. This does not
negate what has been said in this dissertation for several reasons. First,
since animal sacrifice and the cross can be compatible (as argued in this
study), Paul's offerings in the temple was an amoral issue. Second, the period
of Acts was one of transition into the church age when sacrifice would no
longer be necessary. Third, Paul was being careful not to offend the Jews.
Fourth, this study has offered ample documentation that sacrifice was largely
occupied with the issue of the divine presence. (Jerry Michael Hullinger,
"A proposed solution to the problem of animal sacrifices in Ezekiel
40-48" [PhD Dissertation; Dallas Theological Seminary, 1993], 231-32 n.
199)
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com
