The significance of the day is expressed in the name "Day of Atonement" Yom ha-kippurim: (
Le 23:27 f;
25:9) in the same manner as it is in the fast which was enjoined on the congregation as a sign of sorrow for their sins (this fasting being the only one enjoined by the law:
Le 16:29,
31;
23:26 ff;
Nu 29:7 ff), as also finally and chiefly in the entire ritual (
Ex 30:10;
Le 23:28;
Nu 29:11;
Le 16; compare also
Eze 18:20,
22). Then, too, the atonement takes place for the sanctuary which has been defiled by the contamination of the Israelites (
Ex 30:10;
Le 16:16-20,
33; compare also
Eze 45:18-20). In particular, mention is made of the Holy of Holies (
Le 16:33, called Miqdash ha-qodhesh; otherwise in Le regularly ha-qodhesh), then of the holy place (16:16b, 20,33), and then of the altar (16:18,20,33). In the last-mentioned case it is a matter of discussion whether the altar of incense is meant, as is claimed by Jewish tradition, on the basis of
Ex 30:10, or the altar of burnt offerings, for which reference could be made to the additional statements in
Le 16:18, to those of 16:16, and to the conclusion in 16:17. The altar of incense (
Ex 30:10) would then be included in the atonement of the tent of meeting. The somewhat remarkable position of 16:17b would then at the same time find its motive in this, that, while 16:6 and 11b mention an atonement only for Aaron and his house, the atonement of the Holy of Holies and of the holy place in 16:17 is for Aaron, his house, and the whole congregation, while the atonement of the burnt-offering altar in the forecourt (16:18) would be intended only for the sins of the congregation. The atonement, however, takes place for all the transgressions of the congregation since the last Day of Atonement (compare 16:21 f, 30,34). In reference to the significance of what is done with the second goat of sin offering, compare 16:8 ff, 20 ff, and AZAZEL, II, 1. In this way Delitzsch has correctly called the Day of Atonement "the Good Friday of the Old Testament." How deeply the consciousness of sin must have been awakened, if the many otherwise commanded private and congregational sacrifices did not make such an institution superfluous, and if even the high priest himself stood before God as a sinner (16:6,11 ff). On this day, with the exception of the mitre, he does not wear the insignia of his high-priestly office, but wears white garments, which in their simplicity correspond to the earnestness of the situation. The repetition of the bath, both in his case and in that of the other persons engaged in the ceremony (16:4,24,26,28), was necessary, because the mere washing of the hands and feet (
Ex 30:19 f) would not suffice on this occasion (compare
Nu 19:7 ff,
19,
21). The flesh of the sin-offering animals was not permitted to be eaten but had to be burned (16:27) because it was sacrificed also for Aaron's sin, and its blood was carried not only into the holy place but also into the Holy of Holies, compare 16:27 with
Le 6:23;
4:11 f,
21;
Ex 29:14;
Le 8:17;
9:11;
10:19. And in comparison with the consciousness of sin that had been aroused, how great must on the other hand God's grace appear, when once in each year a general remission of all the sins that had been forgiven was guaranteed.