Legal Expiation Definition

(1) That, in accordance with the law, in all deaths, the perpetrator was sentenced to death after lawful proof or conviction and that no victim could exempt him from punishment. Search the Legal Abbreviations and Acronyms Dictionary for acronyms and/or abbreviations that contain atonement. 3. “With regard to the atoning character of the victims of the law, the argument does not require it to prove that all Levitical offerings were of that character. There were also offerings for persons and for things prescribed for purification which were identical; But they, too, were born out of the guiding notion of atoning sacrifice and the legal purification that resulted from the forgiveness of sins. It is enough to prove that the great and remarkable sacrifices of the Jews were strictly atonement, and that, thanks to them, the victims were freed from the punishment and death, for which they had been appointed by the legislator. When we also speak of vicarious victims, we do not mean, on the one hand, a substitute such that the victim would have to bear the same degree of pain and suffering as the perpetrator himself; or, on the other hand, that it was placed in the author`s place as a mere symbolic act by which he confessed his desert to punishment; But the replacement by divine destiny, by which the. The victim was subjected to suffering and death in place of the perpetrator, allowing the perpetrator himself to be released. From this point of view, it is difficult to imagine why such a competent writer is an archbishop. Magee should prefer to use the term “importation by proxy” instead of the simple and established term “by proxy”, because otherwise the contradictory concept of substitution can be sufficiently protected and the expression “importation by proxy” can certainly be dissolved into this figurative concept of mere symbolic action which, plausible as it is, actually deprives the former victims of their true sacrifice of Christ. Efficiency. Proxy action is acting for others; suffering by proxy is suffering for others; but the nature and circumstances of this suffering in the case of Christ must be determined by the teaching of Scripture in general, and not entirely by the concept itself, which, however, is useful for this purpose (and must therefore be preserved), that it indicates the sense in which those who use it understand the explanation of Scripture, “Christ died for us,” so that he died not only for our benefit, but in our place; in other words, that without His death, those who believe in Him would have personally suffered the death that is the punishment for any violation of God`s law. Asian Law, `Atonement` (legaldictionary.lawin.org 2013) entered into force on October 15, 2022 Britannica.com: Encyclopedia article on atonement (2013, 05).

Atonement legaldictionary.lawin.org Retrieved September 10, 2022, from September 10. legaldictionary.lawin.org/expiation/. “How then to explain this impressive and unique ceremonial? Should we use the concept of fines and penalties? If this is the case, this victim and other reported victims must be considered in the light of criminal laws. But this cannot happen with the appointment of such victims every year in the following generations: “It will be a status for you forever.” The law fixes a specific day of the year for the atonement for the sins of the high priest himself and of the entire community, for all high priests and all generations of the church. Could a law be passed which, at some point, imposes a certain punishment on an entire people and its high priest, thus assuming that they really transgress it? The sacrifice was also for sins in general; And yet, the punishment, if it were one, is no higher than what individuals have often suffered for individual transgressions. Surely nothing can be more absurd than this assumption. Are we to explain this by saying that sacrifices were offered for the benefit of the worshipper, but excluding the notion of atonement? But here we are obliged to limit the benefits to reconciliation and the elimination of sins, by the intended means of bloodshed and the offering of blood to the holy place, accompanied by the expressive ceremony of the laying on of hands on the head of the sacrifice; their meaning, beyond any controversy, is determined by the priests who, by this sacrifice, confess the sins of all the people and at the same time put on their heads the vengeance due to them (16:21). Should we just say that it was a symbol? But the question remains: what was the symbol? To determine this, list the different parts of the symbolic action. Here is the confession of sin; Confession to God at the door, at the tabernacle; the replacement of a victim; the transfer of sins to this sacrifice; the bloodshed that God commanded to make the atonement of the soul; the transport of blood to the holiest place, the permission of which clearly marked divine acceptance; the elimination of injustice; and the real reconciliation of the people with God. So if it`s symbolic, there`s nothing very similar to that; it has never had or can never have anything equivalent except the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ and the communication of the benefits of his passion in forgiving sins to those who believe in him, and ir. their reconciliation with God.

Finally, are we to say that these victims had respect, not for God to obtain forgiveness through atonement, but for sacrifice by teaching Him moral lessons and creating moral dispositions? We answer that this hypothesis leaves many essential circumstances of the ceremonial completely unexplained. The tabernacle and temple were built by His own command for God`s residence. There it was his will to be addressed, and it was to these holy places that sacrifices were to be made. Elsewhere, they might as well have been offered if they had had respect only for the supplier; but they were to be brought to God, that they were to be offered according to a prescribed ritual and by order of men appointed for that purpose. Now, there is really no reason for them to be offered in the sanctuary and not in any other place, except that they were offered to the inhabitant of the sanctuary; Nor could they be offered in his presence without respect for him. This was the mode of reasoning adopted by the author of the moral philosopher, and since his time no weight has been added to these objections. Now, much of this can be granted without prejudging the argument, and is actually nothing more than what the most orthodox authors on the subject have often noted. The law under which the Jews were placed was for them both a moral and a political law; And the legislature exempted certain crimes from pardon because that would have been an exemption from temporal death, which was the punishment of the state.