Texts in Conversation
In Leviticus, one goat is sacrificed and another sent away to Azazel on the Day of Atonement. In his Dialogue with Trypho, Justin interprets the goats as symbols of Jesus appearing in suffering and returning in glory.
Share:
2500 BCE
1000+ CE
Leviticus 16:9–10
Hebrew Bible
5 He must also take two male goats from the congregation of the Israelites for a sin offering and one ram for a burnt offering. 6 Then Aaron is to present the sin-offering bull which is for himself and is to make atonement on behalf of himself and his household. 7 Next he must take the two goats and stand them before the Lord at the entrance of the Meeting Tent, 8 and Aaron is to cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the Lord and one lot for Azazel. 9 Aaron must then present the goat which has been designated by lot for the Lord, and he is to make it a sin offering, 10 but the goat which has been designated by lot for Azazel is to be stood alive before the Lord to make atonement on it by sending it away into the desert to Azazel.
Date: 5th century BCE (final composition) (based on scholarly estimates)
Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 40.4
Early Christian
4 And the two goats that were ordered to be offered during the fast, of which one was sent away as the scape [goat] and the other sacrificed, likewise announced the two comings of Christ: the first, in which the elders of your people and the priests laid hands on Him, put Him to death, and sent Him away as the scape [goat]; and the second, because in the same place in Jerusalem you will recognize Him whom you dishonored, who was an offering for all sinners who are willing to repent and to keep the fast Isaiah speaks of, untying the knots of forced contracts and keeping the other precepts he likewise lists, which I have quoted and which those who believe in Jesus do. 5 And further, you know that the offering of the two goats commanded for the fast was not permitted anywhere else either, but only in Jerusalem.
Date: 155–160 CE (based on scholarly estimates)
Search:
Notes and References
“... to both goats. The scapegoat refers only to the Passion. the saerificial goat
to the Second Parousia. Some motifs from Barnabas are missing, e.g. thc
eating of the goat and the scarlet wool. Apparently, Justin's text is not a
reworking of Bamabas but depends directly on the proto-typology. This is
shown, for exa:mple, by the reference to the death of the scapegoat, a fact
Justin could not have learot from the Bible or from Barnabas, but only
from Jewish tradition.33 Justin explicitly intcrprets the theological implica-
tions of the sacrificial goat typology of Christ as vicarious atonement for
all sinners. This is somewhat strange considering the association of the
scapegoat, not the sacrificial goat, with the Passion. The ceference to Jeru-
salem as merely a sacrificial place is a favorite idea of Justin's and was
therefore most probably inserted by him.34 Furthennore, Justin refers to
lsaiah 58 in the context of Yom K.ippur and is the earllest text to do so. ...”
Ben Ezra, Daniel Stokl
The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity
(p. 155–156) Mohr Siebeck, 2003
* The use of references are not endorsements of their contents. Please read the entirety of the provided reference(s) to understand the author's full intentions regarding the use of these texts.
Your Feedback:
Leave a Comment
Anonymous comments are welcome. All comments are subject to moderation.
User Comments
,