Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol I:
BARNABAS: Chapter VII.—Fasting, and the goat...

Chapter VII.—Fasting, and the goat sent away, were types of Christ.

Understand, then, ye children of gladness, that the good Lord has foreshown all things to us, that we might know to whom we ought for everything to render thanksgiving and praise. If therefore the Son of God, who is Lord [of all things], and who will judge the living and the dead, suffered, that His stroke might give us life, let us believe that the Son of God could not have suffered except for our sakes. Moreover, when fixed to the cross, He had given Him to drink vinegar and gall. Hearken how the priests of the people 1527 gave previous indications of this. His commandment having been written, the Lord enjoined, that whosoever did not keep the fast should be put to death, because He also Himself was to offer in sacrifice for our sins the vessel of the Spirit, in order that the type established in Isaac when he was offered upon the altar might be fully accomplished. What, then, says He in the prophet? “And let them eat of the goat which is offered, with fasting, for all their sins.” 1528 Attend carefully: “And let all the priests alone eat the inwards, unwashed with vinegar.” Wherefore? Because to me, who am to offer my flesh for the sins of my new people, ye are to give gall with vinegar to drink: eat ye alone, while the people fast and mourn in sackcloth and ashes. [These things were done] that He might show that it was necessary for Him to suffer for them. 1529 How, 1530 then, ran the commandment? Give your attention. Take two goats of goodly aspect, and similar to each other, and offer them. And let the priest take one as a burnt-offering for sins. 1531 And what should they do with the other? “Accursed,” says He, “is the one.” Mark how the type of Jesus 1532 now comes out. “And all of you spit upon it, and pierce it, and encircle its head with scarlet wool, and thus let it be driven into the wilderness.” And when all this has been done, he who bears the goat brings it into the desert, and takes the wool off from it, and places that upon a shrub which is called Rachia, 1533 of which also we are accustomed to eat the fruits 1534 when we find them in the field. Of this 1535 kind of shrub alone the fruits are sweet. Why then, again, is this? Give good heed. [You see] “one upon the altar, and the other accursed;” and why [do you behold] the one that is accursed crowned? Because they shall see Him then in that day having a scarlet robe about his body down to his feet; and they shall say, Is not this He whom we once despised, and pierced, and mocked, and crucified? Truly this is 1536 He who then declared Himself to be the Son of God. For how like is He to Him! 1537 With a view to this, [He required] the goats to be of goodly aspect, and similar, that, when they see Him then coming, they may be amazed by the likeness of the goat. Behold, then, 1538 the type of Jesus who was to suffer. But why is it that they p. 142 place the wool in the midst of thorns? It is a type of Jesus set before the view of the Church. [They 1539 place the wool among thorns], that any one who wishes to bear it away may find it necessary to suffer much, because the thorn is formidable, and thus obtain it only as the result of suffering. Thus also, says He, “Those who wish to behold Me, and lay hold of My kingdom, must through tribulation and suffering obtain Me.” 1540

Footnotes

Cod. Sin. reads “temple,” which is adopted by Hilgenfeld.

Not to be found in Scripture, as is the case also with what follows. Hefele remarks, that “certain false traditions respecting the Jewish rites seem to have prevailed among the Christians of the second century, of which Barnabas here adopts some, as do Justin (Dial. c. Try. 40) and Tertullian (adv. Jud. 14; adv. Marc. iii. 7).”

Cod. Sin. has “by them.”

Cod. Sin. reads, “what commanded He?”

Cod. Sin. reads, “one as a burnt-offering, and one for sins.”

Cod. Sin. reads, “type of God,” but it has been corrected to “Jesus.”

In Cod. Sin. we find “Rachel.” The orthography is doubtful, but there is little question that a kind of bramble-bush is intended.

Thus the Latin interprets: others render “shoots.”

Cod. Sin. has “thus” instead of “this.”

Literally, “was.”

The text is here in great confusion, though the meaning is plain. Dressel reads, “For how are they alike, and why [does He enjoin] that the goats should be good and alike?” The Cod. Sin. reads, “How is He like Him? For this that,” etc.

Cod. Sin. here inserts “the goat.”

Cod. Sin. reads, “for as he who … so, says he,” etc.

Comp. Acts xiv. 22.