[636] “He was ultimately ‘slain,’ not by the effects of the anguish of his corporeal frame, but by the effects of the mightier anguish of his mind; the fleshy walls of his heart--like the veil, as it were, in the temple of his human body--becoming rent and riven, as, for us, ‘he poured out his soul unto death.’” (Sir James Y. Simpson, cited in Appendix to Stroud’s _Physical Cause of Death of Christ_.) [637] Isa. 53 : 12. [638] Comp. Rom. 6 : 23; 1 Pet. 3 : 18; Isa. 53 : 4-6. [639] 1 John 5 : 11, 12. [640] Lev. 17 : 11. [641] Lev. 17 : 14. [642] See pages 116-125. [643] Eph. 1 : 7. [644] 1 John 1 : 7. [645] Rev. 1 : 5. [646] 2 Cor. 5 : 17. [647] Col. 3 : 3. [648] 1 John 5 : 20. [649] 1 John 5 : 13. [650] John 20 : 31. [651] Rom. 5 : 8-12. [652] 2 Pet. 1 : 4. [653] Gal. 2 : 20. [654] John 5 : 26. [655] Col. 1 : 19, 20. [656] Eph. 2 : 11-16. [657] Col. 2 : 9-11. [658] Gal. 3 : 28, 29. [659] Heb. 10 : 14-22. [660] See page 167 ff., _supra_. [661] Comp. Heb. 9 : 24-28; 10 : 10. [662] Heb. 10 : 28, 29. [663] The Covenant of Bread and the Covenant of Blood are two distinct covenants, in Oriental practice as well as in biblical teaching; although this difference has been strangely overlooked by biblical students in the realm of Orientalisms. The Covenant of Bread is temporary; the Covenant of Blood is permanent. The one secures a truce; the other secures a vital union. Symbolically, the one gives nourishment; the other gives life. The Covenant of Bread is an exhibit and a pledge of hospitality, and it brings one into family or tribal relations with those proffering it. The Covenant of Blood is immediately personal and individual. There seems to be an unconscious trace of this distinction in the refusal of the Romish Church to include the laity in the symbolizing of the Covenant of Blood, at the Lord’s table. [664] 1 Cor. 10 : 14-17. [665] Heb. 13 : 20, 21. APPENDIX. APPENDIX. IMPORTANCE OF THIS RITE STRANGELY UNDERVALUED. It seems strange that a primitive rite like the blood-covenant, with its world-wide sweep, and its manifold applications to the history of sacrifice, should have received so little attention from students of the latter theme. Nor has it been entirely ignored by them; although its illustrations have, in this connection, been drawn almost entirely from the field of the classic writers, where its religious aspects have a minor prominence; and, as a result, the suggestion of any real importance in the religious symbolism of this rite has been, generally, brushed aside without its receiving due consideration.