Big Idea: The high priest must be purified before conducting the Day of Atonement sacrifices.
Understanding the Text
Leviticus 16, on the Day of Atonement, is a transitional chapter, giving a general remedy for the problem of uncleanness described in Leviticus 11–15. It also prepares the way for the laws of holiness that follow (Lev. 17–27).
Leviticus 16 is arguably the most important chapter in Leviticus, introducing the Day of Atonement, the highest and most sacred day in the Israelite calendar. Its importance is seen in the elaborate preparation ritual that Aaron undergoes to be qualified to conduct the main sacrifice later. Leviticus 16:1–14 sets out that preparation ritual.
Interpretive Insights
16:1 the death of the two sons of Aaron. This refers to Nadab and Abihu, who had died after offering “unauthorized fire” before Yahweh (Lev. 10:1–5). This incident warns all priests that they must respect the sanctity of God and his dwelling place, the tabernacle.
16:2 he is not to come whenever he chooses . . . or else he will die. “Whenever he chooses” is literally “at any time” in Hebrew (cf. NRSV). “Or else he will die” is better rendered “lest he die” (NKJV) because the wording in Hebrew does not necessarily mean that he will die, but means only that he is liable to sudden death.
the Most Holy Place behind the curtain. More simply, it is “the holy place” (KJV, NASB, HCSB) or “the sanctuary” (NRSV). “Behind the curtain” can also be “inside the veil” (ESV, NASB). The curtain separates the holy place in the tent from the most holy place, where the ark of the covenant stands (see Exod. 26:31–34). Ordinary priests can never go “behind the curtain.” Only the high priest can, once a year on the Day of Atonement as described in this chapter.
For I will appear in the cloud. During the exodus the glory of God had manifested itself in a “cloud” that would descend into the holy of holies wherever Israel camped. At that point access to the tent of meeting had been limited (Exod. 13:21; 40:34–38). The purpose of the curtain is to block any unveiled, close-up view of the presence of God in the most holy place. Although it is permissible to view God’s pillar of cloud from a distance, to do so unveiled and up close can be fatal.
the atonement cover. The “atonement cover” (kapporet) is the lid of the ark of the covenant. It is 2.5 by 1.5 cubits (roughly 3.75 feet by 2.25 feet) and made of pure gold. The rest of the ark is a wooden box covered with gold, and at the ends of the cover are two angelic cherubim made of hammered gold. See Exodus 25:17–22. The ark is kept in the most holy place and is the most sacred object in Israelite religion. “Atonement cover” has traditionally been rendered “mercy seat” (KJV, NRSV, ESV), though the Hebrew is only indirectly related to the concept of mercy and does not in itself convey the sense of seat. The kapporet is understood to be the throne upon which God sits surrounded by cherubim as his royal entourage (1 Sam. 4:4; cf. Exod. 37:7; Pss. 80:1; 99:1; Isa. 37:16). That is one basis for the traditional rendering “mercy seat.” Alternatively, the ark may be regarded as the earthly footstool for God’s heavenly throne.
Some translators render kapporet simply “cover” or “lid” (NRSVmg) based on the meaning of kapporet’s root kapar, which in the Qal stem allegedly means “to cover.” However, this rendering is problematic. First, kapar probably means not “to cover” but instead “to daub with pitch” (koper) (Gen. 6:14). Second, the doubling of the middle consonant “p” in kipporet indicates that the noun is related to kipper, the Piel form of the root, not the Qal meaning. In the Piel kapar means specifically “to make atonement” rather than “to cover, apply pitch” (see “Additional Insights” following the unit on Lev. 4:1–35). Third, the prominent place of the kapporet in the Day of Atonement (yom kippurim) ritual in Leviticus 16 makes the association of the word kipporet with the concept of atonement (kippurim) highly probable. Theologically, the kipporet is the place where the blood of the atoning sacrifice is applied on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:13–16). It is there where atonement takes place. The Septuagint rendering of kapporet is hilast?rion, rendered “mercy seat” (ESV, KJV) or “atonement cover” (NIV) in Hebrews 9:5, but the cognate verb hilaskomi (Heb. 2:17) is translated “make atonement” (NIV) or “make propitiation” (ESV), and the cognate noun hilasmos is rendered “atoning sacrifice” (NIV) or “propitiation” (ESV) (1 John 2:2; 4:10). These cognates suggest that the Septuagint considers the hilast?rion/kapporet to be more than a mere “cover.” Romans 3:25 may see a typology that relates the atonement cover (hilast?rion) with Christ (cf. NIVmg): the blood of the atoning sacrifice that purges sin before God’s throne is that of Christ on the cross.
16:3–10 These verses give a synopsis of the sacrifices: a bull, two rams, two goats.
16:3 bull for a sin offering. Sin offerings for a high priest are always bulls (Lev. 4:3). This provides purification for Aaron and his fellow priests (see v. 6), purging the sanctuary of Aaron’s personal sins and impurities. Only after the sin offering has been offered is the high priest permitted to enter the most holy place on the Day of Atonement. Verses 11–14 below describe this offering in more detail.
ram for a burnt offering. This offering takes place at Leviticus 16:24. It seeks further appeasement for any priestly offenses and seeks God’s goodwill for the Day of Atonement goat offering.
16:4 the sacred linen tunic, with linen undergarments next to his body . . . linen sash . . . linen turban. See Exodus 28:4, 39; Leviticus 8:7–9. These are “sacred” or “holy” because they are set apart for use in the sanctuary. “Linen” (bad) is a kind of simple white cloth made from relatively rough flax.1 Angels in the presence of God also are described as wearing linen (Ezek. 9:2–3, 11; 10:2; Dan. 10:5). “Body” is literally “flesh” and may also indicate “genitals.” No mention is made of the robe, the ephod, or the breastplate (Lev. 8:7–8) until the end of the ritual (v. 24), when Aaron puts on his “regular garments.” Aaron evidently had been attired like an ordinary priest (cf. Exod. 28:27–29), perhaps as an act of humility before God. This would also save the fancier vestments from getting stained with blood.
bathe himself with water. Ordinarily priests must wash their hands and feet before officiating (Exod. 30:19), but the high priest on this day needs more thorough purification and must bathe his whole body. He will do the same at the end of the ritual (Lev. 16:26).
16:5 From the Israelite community. These animals are offered on behalf of the Israelites.
two male goats for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering. The two goats constitute one sin offering even though one is slaughtered (Lev. 16:15–19) while the other is not (Lev. 16:20–22). The ram is probably the burnt offering for Aaron at the conclusion of the Day of Atonement ceremonies in Leviticus 16:24.
16:6 offer the bull . . . to make atonement for him and his household. This fulfills verse 3 above. “Household” means especially Aaron’s priestly sons Eleazar and Ithamar.
16:8 cast lots for the two goats. To be chosen by lot indicates being chosen by God (cf. Prov. 16:33). One lot is cast for Yahweh, and this goat is slaughtered as a sin offering. The other lot is cast for the “scapegoat” (‘aza’zel), and this goat is sent into the desert (v. 10).
16:10 sending it into the wilderness as a scapegoat. See “Additional Insights” following this unit.
16:12–13 fragrant incense . . . will conceal the atonement cover. Expanding on the directions in verse 6 regarding the bull as a burnt offering for Aaron, the text adds the need to offer burning incense along with the bull, which would both mask the putrid smell and conceal the atonement cover to prevent Aaron from a potentially fatal direct viewing of God’s presence (“so that [Aaron] will not die” [v. 13]). Looking directly at the visible presence of God that shows itself above the atonement cover (see v. 2) unveiled and close up could be fatal, for no one can see God and live (Exod. 33:20). So when the high priest enters the holy of holies, God’s appearance must be masked with the smoke of incense.
tablets of the covenant law. “Covenant law” (‘edut) is also rendered “testimony” (KJV, NIV 1984), “pact” (NJPS), or “covenant” (NRSV). It is an abbreviated way to refer to the “ark of the ‘edut” (Exod. 16:34; 27:31; 30:6, 36; Num. 17:4, 10). Traditionally, ‘edut is derived from the Hebrew word ‘ud (“to bear witness”) and taken to mean “testimony.” It could instead be derived from the Akkadian word adu (“a type of formal agreement”), thereby making “ark of the ‘edut [= pact]” equivalent to “the ark of the covenant.” Either way, ‘edut is related to the tablets of the covenant law that have been placed in the ark (Exod. 31:18; 40:20), referring either to the law’s witness or to those tablets as a symbol of the pact between God and Israel.
16:14 sprinkle some of it . . . seven times before the atonement cover. The number “seven” is ubiquitous in the rituals, conveying an aura of holiness derived from the seventh day of creation (Gen. 2:3). On the “atonement cover,” see verse 2. The tabernacle is purged by blood of priestly defilement as far as the high priest goes, to the throne of God itself.
Theological Insights
Rituals are a way of underscoring the importance of a society’s or group’s values. In the United States, saying the Pledge of Allegiance as the school day begins is a way of inculcating patriotism and loyalty to one’s country, as are flag-raising ceremonies and fireworks on the Fourth of July. Graduation ceremonies underscore the value placed on academic achievement. The common ritual of serving turkey at Thanksgiving is a way of highlighting the importance of family gatherings.
The Bible’s rituals similarly serve to underscore important core values. The more elaborate the ritual, the more important the values. The complexity of these rituals shows the theological importance of the Day of Atonement sacrifice. The Israelites did not just perform the sacrifice. There were many ritual preliminaries before they could even start.
The rituals of Leviticus 16 show the value of respecting the holiness of God and the need for atoning sacrifice before attempting to approach him. God’s holiness is incompatible with human impurity. God wanted to be there in Israel’s midst, but he could not compromise his holiness, so he provided rituals to be performed so that his presence could be maintained despite Israel’s impurities (Lev. 16:16). God’s presence in the holy of holies is important because it was the means through which his relationship with Israel functioned at that time.
The church too has its rituals to underscore its important values. Baptism shows the importance of initiation and entrance into God’s church through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:12). The Lord’s Supper underscores the importance of the death of Christ—a death foreshadowed by the Day of Atonement ritual—and his awaited return (1 Cor. 11:23–26). It is called the “Lord’s table” (1 Cor. 10:21), a reminder of his invisible presence serving as host. The rites of baptism and the Lord’s Supper together underscore the importance of Christ’s incarnation, death, resurrection, presence, and second coming, each cherished, foundational doctrines of the faith. There, as here, elaborate ritual underscores that something is theologically important.
The Scapegoat: A major crux of interpretation in Leviticus 16 is the meaning of the term ‘aza’zel (see NIVmg) in verses 8, 10, 26. This term has traditionally been taken to mean “scapegoat” (NIV, KJV, NASB, NKJV). Others take it as a proper name of a god/demon called “Azazel” (ESV, HCSB, CEV, NASBmg, NRSV). A third option is that this is a proper name of a geographic place, “wilderness of Azazel” (NLT).
The traditional view, translating the term as “scapegoat,” understands ‘aza’zel as a compound word: ‘az (“goat”) plus ’azal (“to go”). Hence, the word would mean “the goat that goes [away], escapes” or the “(e)scape-goat.” This fits the fact that the goat designated as the ‘aza’zel is the one driven into the desert, and it thus escapes being slaughtered. This view was taken by the Greek Septuagint (second century BC), which renders it “one for apopompaios,” meaning “one for sending-away.” This view is reflected also in the Latin Vulgate, Tyndale’s English translation (1530), and the KJV. Against this view, compound words in Hebrew (unlike Greek) are very rare except in proper names.
A second view takes ‘aza’zel as the proper name. “Azazel” is often taken as a name of a god or demon, perhaps a goat-demon (‘az means “goat” in Hebrew) or some other demon unrelated to goats. This view is supported by the parallel formulation “one lot for the Lord [Yahweh] and the other lot for Azazel” (v. 8 ESV). That parallel formulation suggests that both Yahweh and ‘aza’zel are proper names. A version of this interpretation is found in the intertestamental pseudepigraphical work 1 Enoch (e.g., 8:1; 9:16; 10:10), which dates from roughly the second century BC, in which Azazel (spelled “Azael”) appears as the leader of the fallen angels. The church theologian Origen, writing in the third century AD, took “Azazel” as a title for the devil (Against Celsus 6), a view compatible with his “ransom to the devil” theory of Christ’s atonement. Against the goat-demon view, however, is the fact that no demon by the name Azazel is known from the ancient Near East outside the Bible, and no Bronze Age goat idols have been discovered archaeologically in ancient Syro-Palestine. Leviticus itself explicitly prohibits making sacrifice to goat-demons (Lev. 17:7) or gods other than Yahweh (Lev. 19:4). While Leviticus 17:7 suggests that belief in goat-demons existed, the idea of sending a Day of Atonement goat to one of them seems at odds with the prohibition against sacrificing to them.
A third view takes ‘aza’zel as a proper name not for a living demon but rather for an impersonal geographic location (“wilderness of Azazel” [NLT]) or some other feature in the wilderness. This could be combined with the demon interpretation: even if Azazel has no real existence, sending the goat to Azazel may mean sending it to the place associated with Azazel, namely, the hideous desert. Parallel language supports this line of interpretation: sending the goat away into the wilderness (Lev. 16:21) arguably means the same thing as sending it away to Azazel (Lev. 16:26). Compare 1 Corinthians 5:5, where turning a church member “over to Satan” means putting that person out of the church and into the world dominated by Satan. Unfortunately, ‘aza’zel as a geographic term is not attested elsewhere in the Bible or in other ancient writings.
In sum, a good case can be made for all three views. For me, the demon view, while not impossible, seems the most problematic of the three since the sending of a goat to any demon seems inconsistent with biblical teaching. “Azazel” as a geographic term is a plausible view, but it lacks any corroborating evidence. Perhaps the traditional view that ‘aza’zel is the one designated for “sending away” (LXX) as the “(e)scape-goat” remains the most likely among the three views unless and until new evidence from the ancient world comes to light supporting “Azazel” as a geographic term or as a term for a god/demon.
Teaching the Text
Leviticus 16:1–14 shows the imperfection of human priests in contrast with the holiness of God.
1. Human priests are imperfect. The central focus of Leviticus 16 is the ritual involving the two goats, but Aaron has much to do first. He must bathe (v. 4b) and put on simple linen clothing (v. 4a), symbolically humbling himself, and he must offer a bull as a sin offering to purify the sanctuary of his personal impurities (vv. 6–14). Only then can he conduct the main ritual, involving the goats. All human beings, including the holy high priest, are subject to contamination by sin and impurity. He cannot offer purification rites for Israel until he does so for himself.
The writer of Hebrews uses this ritual to show the superiority of Christ’s priesthood. Aaron, as a sinner, must sacrifice for himself before entering the most holy place, but Christ, being “unblemished,” does not (Heb. 7:26–27; 9:7, 14).
There is an analogy with the Lord’s Supper. Aaron had to deal with his own sin and impurity before the Day of Atonement sacrifice. Similarly, each one of us is to conduct self-examination before partaking of the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 11:28). All of us need cleansing before approaching the presence of God.
2. God is holy. The text begins by recalling how Aaron’s two sons died because they approached God improperly (v. 2; see Lev. 10). It is dangerous for sinful priests to be so close to the holy God. That is why ritual purification is essential—the bull for a purification offering, and a ram for a burnt offering—to purge the sanctuary of a priest’s defilements to make it safe for the priest to enter. No one can see God and live (Exod. 33:20). It is necessary to fill the room with incense to obscure the priest’s vision of the Holy One enthroned above the ark (vv. 12–13) so that Aaron can safely apply the blood with his finger to the front of the atonement cover and dash blood seven times in front of it (v. 14) without dying. All this in turn expresses proper recognition of God’s holiness so that God will find Aaron’s sacrifices for the people of Israel acceptable and be pleased to continue to dwell among them.
It is easy for us today to forget the severe holiness of God. Modern worship is often too casual, viewing God as little more than the worshiper’s “buddy.” Rarely does one come away with a sense of the fearsome holiness of God in worship. But this is unfortunate. God is still a holy God. The preparation ritual of Aaron before performing the Day of Atonement sacrifice is a reminder of that which we ought not forget.
Illustrating the Text
The Aaronic priesthood pointed to Jesus Christ, the only perfect priest.
Scenario: There are a few basic elements of a groundbreaking ceremony: shiny shovels, hard hats, and soft ground. Those closest to the project, often including honored guests, the architect, and the contractor, push shovels down into the ground and turn over the earth. Everyone present understands that this act is symbolic of what will actually take place. For a building to be completed, the foundation must be dug out and poured. A frame must be erected. Electricity and plumbing must be installed. And much more must be done. The groundbreaking is just the first step, pointing toward a process that will be completed only with a ribbon-cutting ceremony, when the building is actually completed and ready for use.
God gave Israel the priesthood and sacrificial system to prepare it. The system provided a picture of the perfect priest who would come. The work that these priests did pointed to the perfect work that only Jesus could do.
We must prepare our hearts for fellowship with the holy God.
Economics: One of the critical steps in purchasing a home is determining that the title is in order. This is why it is essential to secure the services of a title company. Such an agency works to ensure that the person who purchases a home will, in fact, be the legal owner. The company guarantees the purchaser that the property really belongs to him or her—free from outstanding claims or unpaid debt. In the end, it is important for the person who purchases the property to know that all other parties have renounced any claim on the property.
Part of preparing our hearts for worship involves renouncing. We must renounce our interest in the things of the world. We must settle our debts with the Lord, ensuring that we are not still tied to things of this world.
The Day of Atonement: The Two Goats
Big Idea: God forgives and forgets the sins of his people.
Understanding the Text
The Day of Atonement was and is the most solemn and sacred day in Judaism. It provides a general remedy for the problem of uncleanness described in Leviticus 11–15, as well as the problem of sin generally. This chapter is arguably the most important in the book of Leviticus.
The Day of Atonement ritual shows the incompatibility of the holy God dwelling with the people’s impurities. The regular sin offering deals with this to a considerable degree. But for God to continue to dwell in their midst, an annual purging of all the people’s sins and impurities from the sanctuary is required, one that covers offenses missed by the regular sacrifices.
Historical and Cultural Background
On the Day of Atonement, Israelites were supposed to fast (Lev. 16:29, 31). Fasting was often done ad hoc in conjunction with prayers for mercy (e.g., 2 Sam. 12:16–23; 1 Kings 21:27–29; Jon. 3:5–10). Jews in Elephantine, Egypt, prayed and fasted in 408 BC in conjunction with a request to build a temple of Ya’u (Yahweh) in Yeb, Egypt.1The Balaam Inscription from Tell Deir Alla, a pagan (perhaps Ammonite) text found in modern Jordan and dating to the Iron Age, describes Balaam as fasting and crying because of what the gods had decreed.2Fasting prepared worshipers to meet with God (Exod. 24:28; 1 Kings 19:8; Daniel 9:3; 10:3). However, the Day of Atonement is the only fast day prescribed in the Pentateuch. By denying themselves food, worshipers expressed humility. Four other fast days are mentioned in Zechariah (Zech. 8:19; 7:3, 5). According to talmudic tradition, these corresponded to stages in Babylon’s capture of Jerusalem. By New Testament times, some Pharisees fasted twice a week (Luke 18:12).
Interpretive Insights
16:15 the goat for the sin offering of the people. See Leviticus 16:5. “Purification offering” (NIVmg) is better here than “sin offering.” See comments at Leviticus 4:3.
as he did with the bull’s blood. See Leviticus 16:12.
on the atonement cover. The sanctuary was cleansed as deeply as any Israelite, the high priest included, could go: the ark’s “atonement cover” (see comments at Lev. 16:2). On “atonement,” see “Additional Insights” following the unit on Leviticus 4:1–35.
16:16 the Most Holy Place. This is better rendered literally, “the Holy Place” (ESV, KJV), meaning the whole tabernacle, not just the holy of holies.
uncleanness . . . rebellion . . . sins. This purification offering cleanses the tent of both Israel’s moral offenses (rebellion and sins) and nonmoral, ceremonial uncleanness. “Rebellion” (lit., “rebellions” or “transgressions” [KJV, ESV, NASB, NRSV]) expresses defiance against God. On “sins,” see comments at Leviticus 4:2.
He is to do the same for the tent of meeting. This should be rendered instead, “And so he will do for the tent of meeting” (ESV, NRSV), summarizing what has just been, not introducing a new act.
among them in the midst of their uncleanness. Purification is necessary because God dwells in the tent surrounded by Israel’s impurities. For God to remain in their midst without his wrath breaking out, his sanctuary must be “fumigated” of the people’s sins and uncleanness. This in effect “reset the equilibrium of the entire sacred compass”—that is, the concentric circles of holiness (see illustration).3
16:17 Aaron goes in . . . the Most Holy Place. Only the high priest, and even he only on the Day of Atonement, can enter the most holy place to sprinkle purifying blood before the ark. This access is limited to the high priest because only he is in the same circle of holiness as the holy of holies (see illustration). Other priests can provide purification of less-holy zones.
16:18 come out to the altar. This is the altar of incense that is “before the Lord” in the holy place outside the most holy place (Lev. 4:7, 18), not the altar of burnt offering east of the tent on which blood is applied with sin offerings for leaders or commoners (Lev. 4:25, 30).
16:19 sprinkle some of the blood . . . seven times. This is done for the priest or the people in front of the curtain of the sanctuary near the altar of incense (Lev. 4:6, 17).
16:20 bring forward the live goat. The “live goat” here is the “scapegoat” (Lev. 16:8–10, 26; see “Additional Insights” following the unit on Lev. 16:1–14).
16:21–22 lay both hands on the head of the live goat. One hand is leaned by the worshiper on the burnt offering (Lev. 1:4), the fellowship offering (Lev. 3:2, 8, 13), and the sin offering (Lev. 4:4, 24, 29, 33). Leaning with two hands by the priest symbolizes transference of sin onto the animal (v. 21b; cf. Lev. 24:14). Transfer rituals in which touching an animal was thought to cause sickness or impurity to pass from a person to the animal (e.g., a puppy) are also known among the ancient Hittites.4In the Mesopotamian Asakki Marsuti incantation ritual for fever, the goat that is the substitute for the sick person is sent out into the wilderness.5
confess.In confessing Israel’s sins, the high priest on the nation’s behalf is both acknowledging and repudiating Israel’s sins. Various terms for “sin” show that offenses of every kind and degree are borne by this goat.
wickedness . . . rebellion . . . sins. “Wickedness” translates ‘awon, from a root meaning “to bend, twist, distort,” and has to do with twisted, warped human behavior that distorts what God requires. On “rebellion” and “sin,” see on verse 16 above.
send the goat away into the wilderness . . . to a remote place. This act symbolizes the removal of Israel’s sins from the camp. The “remote place” is literally a land “cut off” (gezerah) from people.
16:23 take off the linen garments. Having entered the most holy place, Aaron’s linen garments are either contaminated with some of Israel’s impurity or more likely supercharged with divine holiness.6Thus, after completing the sin offerings and sending forth the goat, he is to remove and leave behind his simple linen garments (cf. Lev. 16:4).
16:24 bathe himself . . . in the sanctuary area. “Sanctuary area” is better rendered literally, “holy place” (NRSV). Bathing cannot take place in the tent of meeting because exposing one’s genitals during ritual worship is forbidden (Exod. 20:26). Indecent exposure can make the priest “incur guilt and die” (Exod. 28:42–43). Presumably, a changing screen in the courtyard is used.7
put on his regular garments. These literally are simply “his garments” (ESV, KJV), the formal “vestments” (NRSV). Until now, he has worn simpler garb (see comments at Lev. 16:4).
16:26 The man who releases the goat as a scapegoat must wash his clothes and bathe himself. Less likely, “goat for Azazel” (ESV, NRSV). See “Additional Insights” following the unit on Leviticus 16:1–14. The man touching the scapegoat (v. 26) and burning the sin-offering carcasses (v. 28) evidently becomes contaminated by the animals’ absorbed impurities.
16:27 The bull and the goat . . . taken outside the camp . . . burned up. Ordinarily, the priests eat the flesh of the sin offerings (see Lev. 6:24–29), but since these sin offerings are on behalf of the priests and the nation of which they are part, everything must be burned, with nothing saved for the priests.
16:29–30 lasting ordinance . . . tenth day of the seventh month. Here the Day of Atonement is established as an annual holy day. The seventh month is Tishri, September–October on our calendars. This holy day occurs five days before the less-somber Festival of Tabernacles (Lev. 23:34).
deny yourselves. “Deny” could also be “humble, afflict” (NASB, ESV, KJV). This is a reference to fasting (NIVmg). Note Psalm 35:13: “I . . . humbled myself with fasting.” Later this day is simply called “the Fast” (Acts 27:9 NRSV). Fasting here is an expression of repentance. Apart from repentance the sacrifices are not acceptable to God.
not do any work . . . because on this day atonement will be made . . . to cleanse you. All work is forbidden, whether by an Israelite or a foreigner, to emphasize the importance of this occasion when sacred space and the people are cleansed and the equilibrium between them that impurity disrupts is reestablished.8
16:31–34 a lasting ordinance . . . make atonement . . . once a year for all the sins of the Israelites. Provision is made for future priests to continue this ritual to cleanse the sanctuary and the people of Israel’s impurities annually.
Theological Insights
What was purged on the Day of Atonement: the people or the sanctuary?
First and foremost, it cleansed the sanctuary. Whatever blood was applied to was cleansed. The blood of the goat was applied to the atonement cover and the altar of incense in the holy place to “made atonement for the Most Holy Place” and to “cleanse it [the altar] . . . from the uncleanness of the Israelites” (Lev. 16:15–20).
Nevertheless, the inclusion of the ritual using the live goat (scapegoat) implies the transfer and removal of Israel’s impurities from the entire community: “The goat will carry on itself all their sins to a remote place” (Lev. 16:22a). The Day of Atonement is also said to cleanse the people from their sins (Lev. 16:30).
So the correct answer is both: the Day of Atonement symbolically cleansed the sanctuary through a blood ritual and symbolically removed sin from both the people and the sanctuary by a transfer ritual involving the live goat. Roy Gane explains the overall system as follows.9 First, during the year various sacrificial rituals transferred impurity from the people to the sanctuary, at which times people received forgiveness. A second stage took place on the Day of Atonement, when rituals symbolically removed from the sanctuary the impurities that had accumulated there throughout the year.
Failure to remove the accumulated sins of the people from the sanctuary would have had dire consequences. Eventually, that sin would have reached “critical mass,” resulting in a “nuclear blast” of God’s wrath against the people.
Teaching the Text
Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), the most solemn and sacred of all of Israel’s holy days, for it deals with purging the sanctuary of Israel’s sins and its ceremonial impurities.
1. God is holy. The whole ritual of the Day of Atonement assumes the holiness of God, a holiness that cannot dwell indefinitely “in the midst of [Israel’s] uncleanness” (Lev. 16:16) without it being addressed. When Aaron entered the most holy place, his clothes seem to have contracted holiness, so they must be taken off and left in the sanctuary (Lev. 16:23). Compare the holiness that Moses contracts on Mount Sinai (Exod. 34:29–30). In Leviticus 16 the whole ritual is an acknowledgment of the holiness of God, from elaborate preparation sacrifices that Aaron conducts before approaching God’s presence (vv. 3–14), to the blood manipulations in the sanctuary (vv. 16–19), to the ritual washings to remove impurities contracted from the goats (vv. 24, 26), to the changing to regular vestments as less holy activities occur (v. 24a), and the postlude burnt offerings (v. 24b). Everything underscores for Israel that the holy God dwells in its midst, a holiness that it must respect. We too need to be aware that God is holy and must be approached with the highest respect.
2. God’s forgiveness is complete. The ritual centers on two goats. The one goat chosen by lot is sacrificed as a sin/purification offering; the other goat (or “scapegoat” [see “Additional Insights” following the unit on Lev. 16:1–14]) is driven into the desert, symbolically bearing away the sins of the people.
The purpose of the Day of Atonement ritual is to address the problem of sin and ceremonial uncleanness, which are incompatible with the holy God dwelling among people. Both the live goat and the sacrificed goat symbolize atonement or purging (Lev. 16:10, 15–16). Apparently, the slaughtered goat’s blood symbolically dislodges and transfers impurity from the inner sanctuary to the high priest, who in turn transfers it to the live goat that then carries it completely away (see “Theological Insights” above).
Walter Kaiser sees the following symbolism.10 The first goat represents sins forgiven. Blood sacrifice is the means for forgiveness of sin (Lev. 17:11). Thus, the slaughtering of the first goat and the sprinkling of its blood in the most holy place illustrates how Israel’s sin was atoned for and forgiven through blood sacrifice. The second goat represents sins forgotten. Israel’s sins are confessed over and symbolically transferred to the second goat by laying two hands upon it; the animal is then driven into the desert. This ritual represents Israel’s sins being completely removed and forgotten by God.
God has graciously provided the Israelites a means for their sins to be forgiven and forgotten while remaining holy himself. Or as the psalmist says, perhaps alluding to the Day of Atonement scapegoat, “As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us” (Ps. 103:12).
The book of Hebrews sees the atoning sacrifices as foreshadowing the atoning work of Christ on the cross. As the high priest purged God’s earthly sanctuary on the Day of Atonement, so Christ enters the heavenly sanctuary to purge it of our sins (Heb. 9:24). But unlike the Day of Atonement sacrifice, Christ’s sacrifice must be offered only once, not annually (Heb. 9:25–26). As Day of Atonement sin offering carcasses were burned “outside the camp” (Lev. 16:27; cf. Lev. 8:17), so Jesus suffers “outside the city gate” (Heb. 13:11–12).
Christians meditating on the Day of Atonement will naturally end up examining themselves and how their sins offend God. But we will also consider what Christ has done for us in making atonement for our sins by bearing them away so that our sins can be completely forgiven and forgotten.
Illustrating the Text
The Jewish Day of Atonement points us to Jesus, the real sacrifice.
Informational: The Day of Atonement, or Yom Kippur, is to this day the most sacred and solemn day in Judaism. It is traditionally dedicated to prayer, complete fasting (with medical exceptions), and attending a synagogue service with an unusually long liturgy. Orthodox Jews may attend a service from 8:00 or 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., followed by an evening service at 5:00 or 6:00 p.m. that continues until sundown. Interspersed in the liturgy are confessions of sin (“We have been treasonable, we have been aggressive, and we have been slanderous”) and petitions for forgiveness. There is also a catchall confession: “Forgive us the breach of positive commands and negative commands, whether or not they involve an act, whether or not they are known to us.”11
Even among Reform Jews, this is a somber day on which sins are confessed. As a new student in the dorm at Hebrew Union College–Jewish Institute of Religion in Cincinnati, I made the mistake of saying to a rabbinical student on the morning of Yom Kippur, hag sameah, meaning “happy holiday.” The rabbinical student looked at me sternly and responded, “Actually, this one is not supposed to be.” It is not a happy holiday; it is a solemn one meant for self-examination and confession of sin.
Since the destruction of the temple in AD 70, Jews no longer sacrifice a goat on the Day of Atonement. Given the centrality of blood in the system of atonement in the Bible (cf. Lev. 17:11), how then can religious Jews suppose that they receive atonement and forgiveness without any bloody sacrifice? Jewish theology responds that repentance now serves as a substitute for blood sacrifice. In Christian theology, in contrast, Christ is the substitute for these sacrifices.
Unlike its usage in modern English, “scapegoating” is a good thing in Scripture.
Popular Culture: In modern English a scapegoat is an innocent person who is blamed for what someone else has done, as was the scapegoat in ancient Israel. An example of scapegoating is when a political leader fires a staff member in order to blame that person for failed or unpopular policies that the leader had in fact promoted. In such a case, just as the scapegoat bears the guilt for Israel’s sins, so the member of the staff is blamed for the leader’s mistakes.
Scapegoating in this sense is a bad thing. But the sort of scapegoating found in the Bible is a good thing. It was good and necessary that the scapegoat bore away Israel’s sins in order for God to remain in Israel’s midst. And it is good that Christ bore our sins (1 Pet. 2:24).