In the Hebrew
Scriptures, the Yahwist tradition first uses the term מִנְחָ֖ה,
“gift, present, or offering” in Genesis within the story of Cain and Abel (chap
4). Cain, who is a gardener, brings to
the Lord an offering from the fruit of the earth, and Abel, who is a shepherd,
offers from the firstlings of his flock and their fat portions. The offering of Abel was accepted by the
Lord, but Cain’s was not. The account
gives no explicit reason why one offering was acceptable and the other was not, though scholars have
presented various possibilities, such as 1) God prefers the offering of
shepherds over gardeners, 2) animal sacrifices (with the shedding of blood?)
are more acceptable than fruit of the earth; 3) the two brothers had differing
motives; 4) they had different approaches to worship reflected in the quality
of their offerings; and 5) it is a mystery of divine election.[1] What is clear from the text is there is a
difference in describing the offerings of the brothers. While Abel brings the firstling of his flock,
Cain, who is himself the firstborn, is described as simply bringing the fruit
of the earth, and not the firstfruits (Lev 2:14).
What
is more certain from the text is the description that follows on the interior
disposition of Cain and the encouragement from the Lord to do what is good.
Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell. The Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry,
and why has your countenance fallen? If you do well, will you
not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is lurking at the door; its
desire is for you, but you must master it” (Gen 4:5-7).
In this passage, there
is a constellation of words that make their first appearance in the Hebrew
Scriptures, such as the word “angry” (חרה), the word
“sin” (חטא),[2]
which means missing the mark, or missing the way, the word “do good” (יטב),
and the word “accepted” (שְׂאֵת). If Cain would do good, be well, be pleasing,[3]
then he would be lifted up or raised up.[4] However, as the story goes Cain does rise up
(קום),
but he does this by doing not good, but evil against his brother whom he kills
(הרג). Did Abel become the victim and scapegoat
because of human “anger,” and “sin,” and because of Cain’s misinterpretation of
the Lord’s instructions?[5] The “sin” was not without, it was
within.
Be
that as it may, the account is telling for the “sacred author” points out both
the importance of inner disposition in the contexts of sacred offerings and
that God determines what an acceptable offering is.[6] An
important dimension of this disposition is the human soul or an inner heart
that is lifted up to God.
Another important
narrative in which sacrifice is center stage is the story of Noah following the
flood, where he offers up (יַּ֥עַל) clean (טָּהֹ֔ר;
LXX, καθαρῶν)
animals and birds (Gen 8:20). This is
the first time we see the term “altar” (מִזְבֵּ֖חַ)
and the term “burnt offering” (עֹלֹ֖ת: עֹלָה), and “pleasing odor”
(רֵ֣יחַ הַנִּיחֹחַ֒).[7] The sacrifice is pleasing to the Lord. How is this possible? Noah gives back the gift of life, which is
itself a gift from God. First, the ר֣וּחַ
(breath) of God was present at creation (1:2).
In the ark with Noah were two of all the flesh that had the ר֥וּחַ (breath
of life) (7:15). Perhaps with a play on
words, the Lord smelled (יָּ֣רַח) the pleasing odor (רֵיחַ)
of the sacrifice.[8] It is difficult to understand how the burnt
offering of living creatures is pleasing to God, unless we understand the
author’s intent in using the term עֹלֹ֖ת, which means
“whole burnt-offering,” “that which goes up to heaven,” the ascending of what
is consumed, which signifies the soul’s ascent in worship (8:21).[9] In other words, it signifies the lifting up
of the human heart and creation to the Lord.
Noah
is presented as one who listens to God’s voice (6:13-21), obeys (v. 22), and
finally, Noah acknowledges God’s sovereignty and offers an acceptable sacrifice to the Lord for
deliverance (8:20-21). This then leads
to God blessing Noah and his sons and reestablishing his covenant with Noah and
all flesh on the earth (9:1-17).[10]
There
are at least three views on the nature of the sacrifice of Noah: 1) John
Skinner thought that it is propitiatory;[11]
2) Umberto Cassuto argued that it is a thanksgiving sacrifice, “to
express…after the manner of firstfruits and the like,” and that Noah
acknowledges that, “everything was from God’s hand…and that He would provide
everything in the future;”[12]
and 3) Gordon Wenham argues that both ideas are appropriate for understanding
the sacrifice of Noah.[13] However, what is certain from the Hebrew text
is that Gen 8:20-22 does not use the term “atonement” in describing Noah’s
burnt offering. This is also true in the
later Aramaic translations of the Pentateuch: the Targum of Onqelos, the Targum
of Neofiti, and the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. As we shall see shortly, the connection
between burnt offering and atonement comes later in the books of Exodus and
Leviticus. We shall also discover that
it is not until Second Temple Judaism that we find atonement connected with the
sacrifice of Noah.
A
gradual development in the Hebrew Scripture will eventually link sacrifice of
burnt offering with atonement.[14] Atoning sacrifices for sin were to be done
according to the Law and within the context of the Tent of Meeting (Lev 1:1-9;
4:13-6:30; chap 16; 17:11-14; Ex 29:31-34).
This continued with the First Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. However, through the prophets, God makes it
clear that the covenantal requirements of “justice and mercy” toward one
another are essential in order for sacrifices to be pleasing to God (Zech 7:9;
Hos 6:6).[15]
During
Second Temple Judaism, a few important changes take place. First, following the desecration of the altar
of burnt offering in the Jewish Temple by Antiochus Epiphanes in the 2nd
century B.C.E. (1 Macc 1:54; Dan 11:31; 12:11), the ideal of martyrdom is seen as achieving atonement (2 Macc 7:37-38;
4 Macc 17:20-22). The death of the
righteous soul is like a “sacrificial burnt offering” acceptable to God (Wis
3:6). As we shall see below,
Pseudo-Philo interprets the offering of Isaac as a worthy sacrifice. Secondly, prayer and righteous deed/good
works were understood as bringing about reconciliation and atonement outside
the religious context of the Jerusalem Temple (Tob 12:9-10; Sir 35:1-5; 1QS
9:1-4; Ps. Sol. 3:8).[16] Finally, we discover what seems to be the
earliest connection made between atonement and the sacrifice made by Noah. The link is first found in Jubilees from the 2nd century
B.C.E. which states that Noah “made atonement for the land” (Jub. 6.1-3),[17]
and in the Genesis Apocryphon, dated
as early as the late 1st century B.C.E., where Noah is said to have
atoned for “all the earth” (1QapGen 10.11-18).[18] However, the Genesis Apocryphon also associated atonement with praise. In the next column,
there is a parallel account of Noah offering up a kind of sacrifice of praise,
thanking God for his mercy upon the earth, for destroying all the workers of
violence, wickedness, and deceit.
[Then I,] Noah went out
and walked through the land, in its length and its breadth […] … upon it;
pleasure in their leaves and fruit. And all the land was filled with grass,
herbs and grain. Then I praised the Lord
of […] … he is eternal, and he is entitled to praise. And I once more blessed
because he had mercy on the earth and because he had removed and destroyed from
it all the workers of violence, wickedness and
deceit, but has saved … for his sake (1QapGen 11.11-14).[19]
In
summary, Noah’s sacrifice is described as an offering of clean animals and
clean birds as a whole burnt offering ascending (עֹלָה)
to God. This visible expression
signified the inner devotion of Noah to God.
God is pleased with the odor. In
response to Noah’s devotion, God blesses Noah, his family, and enters into an
everlasting covenant with Noah, the earth, and all flesh.
[2] TWOT
277.
[5] This is language from Girard, however,
he interprets the event with the following perspective: “One of the brothers
kills the other, and the murderer is the one who does not have the
violence-outlet of animal sacrifice at his disposal. This difference between sacrificial and
nonsacrificial cults determines, in effect, God’s judgement in favor of
Abel. To say that God accedes to Abel’s
sacrificial offerings but rejects the offerings of Cain is simply another way
of saying—from the viewpoint of the divinity—that Cain is a murderer, whereas
his brother is not” (Girard, Violence and
the Sacred, 4).
[6] Daly, Sacrifice Unveiled, 2: Daly has “importance of religious
disposition” and “acceptable sacrifice.”
[7] The phrase appears later in Ex 19:18,
25, 41, and Lev 1:9.
[10] God gives to Noah animals, birds, and
fish for food, provided he does not eat the flesh with its life, that is, its
blood (vv. 3-4).
[13] Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1–15 (vol. 1; Word Biblical Commentary; Dallas: Word,
Incorporated, 1998), 189.
[15] Daily, Sacrifice Unveiled, 2-3.
[16] However, for an exception see the War Scroll, which speaks of restored
worship where holocausts and sacrifices are offered to God to atone for the
congregation and to satisfy themselves perpetuity at God’s table of glory (1QM 2.5). * E. P. Sanders holds
the view that this worship refers to a restored temple (Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 83). *
[17] “And on the first of the third month,
he went out of the ark, and he built an altar on that mountain. And he made
atonement for the land. And he took the kid of a goat, and he made atonement
with its blood for all the sins of the land because everything which was on it
had been blotted out except those who were in the ark with Noah. And he offered
up the fat upon the altar. And he took a calf, a goat, a lamb, [kids], salt, a
turtledove, and a young dove, and he offered up a burnt offering on the altar.
And he placed upon them an offering kneaded with oil. And he sprinkled wine,
and placed frankincense upon everything. And he offered up a sweet aroma which
was pleasing before the LORD” (James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha and the New Testament: Expansions of the “Old Testament” and
Legends, Wisdom, and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms and Odes,
Fragments of Lost Judeo-Hellenistic Works (vol. 2; New Haven; London: Yale
University Press, 1985), 66). *
[18] “Then … and he [Noah] took from … […]
the ark settled [on] one of the mountains of Hurarat. And eternal fire […] I
atoned [כפרת] for all the whole earth …[…] … first … […] … and I burned the
fat on the fire, and secondly … their blood to the base of the altar … and I
burned all their flesh on the altar, and thirdly the turtledoves… on the altar,
an offering … on it I put fine flour mixed in oil together with frankincense,
as a meal-offering… on all of them I placed salt, and the scent of my
burnt-offering ascended to the [he]aven. Blank
Then the Highest … […].”
Florentino
Garcı́a Martı́nez and Eibert
J. C. Tigchelaar, “The
Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (translations)” (Leiden; New York: Brill, 1997–1998), 33. *
[19] Martinez and Tigchelaar, “The Dead Sea
Scrolls,” 35.
No comments:
Post a Comment