[Footnote A: Gen. iii:13, 15.]

In this passage Christians with justice have always seen the proclamation of the good tidings of the final victory over sin. "It is in Christ that the seed of the woman crushes the serpent."[A]

[Footnote A: Dummelow's Commentary on Gen. iii.]

2. Atonement Foreshadowed in Ancient Sacrifices: The Atonement is also foreshadowed in the sacrifices of burnt offerings of Adam, his son Abel and the early Bible patriarchs. So meagre is the Bible account of the origin of sacrifices that some have doubted if they bore any relation to the sacrifice to be offered by the Christ, or were at all of divine origin.[A] Our scripture, however, the Book, of Moses, sets the matter at rest for Latter-day Saints; for there it is written:

[Footnote A: "In tracing the history of sacrifice, from its first beginning to its perfect development in the Mosaic ritual, we are at once met by the long-disputed question, as to the origin of sacrifice; whether it arose from a natural instinct of man, sanctioned and guided by God, or whether it was the subject of some distinct primeval revelation. * * * The great difficulty in the theory which refers it to a distinct command of God, is the total silence of Holy Scriptures—a silence the more remarkable, when contrasted with the distinct reference made in Gen. ii to the origin of the Sabbath. Sacrifice, when first mentioned, in the case of Cain and Abel, is referred to as a thing of course; it is said to have been 'brought' by men; there is no hint of any command given by God. This consideration, the strength of which no ingenuity has been able to impair, although it does not actually disprove the formal revelation of sacrifice; yet at least forbids the assertion of it, as of a positive and important doctrine." (Smith's "Bible Dictionary"—Hackett ed.—Art. "Sacrifice," Vol. IV, p. 2770).

Was sacrifice in its origin "a human invention or a divine institution; and whether any of the sacrifices before the law, or under the law, were sacrifices of expiation. Eminent and numerous are the authorities on both sides of these questions; but the balance of theological opinion preponderated greatly for the affirmative in each of them. On the lower point, however, (viz., were the sacrifices sacrifices of expiation) most of those who deny that there was an expiatory sacrifice before the law, admit its existence under the law; and on the first, those who hold that sacrifice was of divine origin, but became much corrupted, and was restored by the Mosaic law, do not in substance differ much from those who hold it to have been a human invention, formally recognized, and remodelled by the law of Moses." Kitto's "Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature," Art. "Sacrifices." The difficulty and doubt in respect of both questions presented by these authorities is overcome by the passage which follows in the text from the Book of Moses.]

"And Adam and Eve, his wife, called upon the name of the Lord, and they heard the voice of the Lord from the way toward the Garden of Eden, speaking unto them, and they saw him not; for they were shut out from his presence. And he gave unto them commandments, that they should worship the Lord their God, and should offer the firstlings of their flocks, for an offering unto the Lord.[A] And Adam was obedient unto the commandments of the Lord. And after many days an angel of the Lord appeared unto Adam, saying: Why dost thou offer sacrifices unto the Lord? And Adam said unto him, I know not, save the Lord commanded me. And then the angel spake saying: This thing is a similitude of the sacrifice of the Only Begotten of the Father, which is full of grace and truth. Wherefore, thou shalt do all that thou doest in the name of the Son, and thou shalt repent and call upon God in the name of the Son forevermore. And in that day the Holy Ghost fell upon Adam, which beareth record of the Father and the Son, saying: I am the only begotten of the Father from the beginning, henceforth and forever, that as thou hast fallen thou mayest be redeemed, and all mankind, even as many as will."

[Footnote A: This doubtless gives the ground of explanation for the acceptance of Abel's offering for a sacrifice, the firstlings of his flock; and the rejection of Cain's offering, the fruits of the ground (Gen. iv:3-7). The one was brought in compliance with the appointment of God, the other was not of divine appointment, but was an unwarranted deviation from the commandment, hence, "the Lord had respect unto Abel and his offering," but not unto Cain's. In Kitto's article on "Sacrifices" there is another very great reason urged as to why Abel's sacrifice was acceptable and why Cain's was not. It is reasonable, and in harmony with the importance of the whole doctrine of the Atonement, and I have nowhere else found the idea so well expressed. "It amounts then to this—that Cain, by bringing an eucharistic (expressing thanks merely) offering, when his brother brought one which was expiatory, denied virtually that his sins deserved death, or that he needed the blood of Atonement. Some go further, and allege that in the text itself, God actually commanded Cain to offer a piacular [expiatory, atoning] sacrifice. The argument does not require this additional circumstance; but it is certainly strengthened by it. When Cain became angry that Abel's offering was regarded with divine complacency, and his own refused, God said to him, 'Why art thou wroth; and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? And if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.' Now the word 'chattah,' translated 'sin' denotes in the law a 'sin-offering' and the word translated 'lieth' is usually applied to the recumbency of the beast. It is therefore proposed to translate the clause, 'sin-offering coucheth at the door; which by paraphrase would mean, 'an animal fit for a sin-offering is here, couching at the door, which thou mayest offer in sacrifice, and thereby render to me an offering as acceptable as that which Abel has presented." (Kitto's "Bible Literature," Art. "Sacrifice.")]

This clearly establishes the divine origin of sacrifices among the antediluvian patriarchs; and, indeed, of all antiquity;[A] and also the fact, that they but foreshadowed the great sacrifice to be made in due time by the Son of God himself. Doctor Wm. Smith, the author of the "Old Testament History," says:

[Footnote A: A strong moral argument in favor of the divine institution of sacrifice, somewhat feebly put by Hallet (Comment, on Heb. xi:4, cited by Magee, "On the Atonement"), has been reproduced with increased force by Faber ("Prim. Sacrifice," p. 183). It amounts to this: