were termed Kebhasim (from kabhas, 'to wash'), 'because they wash away the sins of
Israel.'31 The quotation jus t made gains additional interest from the circumstance, that it
occurs in a 'meditation' (if such it may be called) for the new moon of the Passover-
month (Nisan). In view of such clear testimony from the time of Christ, less positiveness
of assertion might, not unreasonably, be expected from those who declare that the
sacrifices bore no reference to the forgiveness of sins, just as, in the face of the
application made by the Baptist and other New Testament writers, more exegetical
modesty seems called for on the part of those who deny the Messianic references in
Isaiah.
27. To those persons who deny to the people of God under the Old Testament the
designation Church, we commend the use of that term by St. Stephen in Acts vii. 38.
28. Pesiqta, ed. Buber, p. 61 b; comp. more fully in Yalkut p. 248 d.
29. In i. p. 249 a.
30. This appears more clearly in the Hebrew, where both words ('lambs' and
'suppressors') are written exactly the same, Μψ#βκ . In Hillel's derivation it is identified
with the root σβκ = #βκ.
31. And this with special reference to Is. i. 18.
If further proof were required that, when John pointed the bystanders to the Figure of
Jesus walking towards them, with these words: 'Behold, the Lamb of God,' he meant
more than His gentleness, meekness, and humility, it would be supplied by the qualifying
explanation, 'Which taketh away the sin of the world.' We prefer rendering the expression
'taketh away' instead of 'beareth,' because it is in that sense that the LXX. uniformly use
the Greek term. Of course, as we view it, the taking away presupposes the taking upon
Himself of the sin of the world. But it is not necessary to suppose that the Baptist clearly
understood that manner of His Saviourship, which only long afterwards, and reluctantly,
ca me to the followers of the Lamb.32 That he understood the application of His ministry
to the whole world, is only what might have been expected of one taught by Isaiah; and
what, indeed, in one or another form, the Synagogue has always believed of the Mess iah.
What was distinctive in the words of the Baptist, seems his view of sin as a totality, rather
than sins: implying the removal of that great barrier between God and man, and the
triumph in that great contest indicated in Gen. iii. 15, which Israel afte r the flesh failed to
perceive. Nor should we omit here to notice an undesigned evidence of the Hebraic origin
of the fourth Gospel; for an Ephesian Gospel, dating from the close of the second
century, would not have placed in its forefront, as the first public testimony of the Baptist
(if, indeed, it would have introduced him at all), a quotation from Isaiah - still less a
sacrificial reference.
32. This meets the objection of Keim (i. 2, p.552), which proceeds on the assumption that
the words of the Baptist imply that he knew not merely that, but how, Jesus would take
away the sin of the world. But his words certainly do not oblige us to think, that he had
the Cross in view. But, surely, it is a most strange idea of Godet, that at His Baptism
Jesus, like all others, made confession of sins; that, as He had none of His own, He set
before the Baptist the picture of the sin of Israel and of the world; and that this had led to
the designation: 'The Lamb of God. Which taketh away the sin of the world.'