The Complete Biblical Library:
3848. כָּפַר kāphar
verb: to smear, to coat with pitch, to cover, to atone
COGNATES:
כֹּפֶר kōpher (3853)
כִּפֻּרִים kippurîm (3854)
כַּפֹּרֶת kappōreth (3855)
חָטָא chā tāʾ (2490)
כָּפָה kāphāh (3836)
נָקָה nāqāh (5536)
Kāphar is a common verb, occurring over 100 times in the OT with a variety of possible meanings. The basic meaning, from which all others extend, is “to cover” over something, and the word often carries the idea of reconciliation. Semitic cognates are noted in a wealth of other languages, including Arabic (“to cover,” “to atone”), Akkadian (“to wipe off,” “to cleanse ritually”) and Syriac (“to wipe off”). The word is used only once in the Qal stem, meaning “to smear” or “to coat.” Noah was commanded to coat the ark with pitch (Gen. 6:14).
The majority of uses of kāphar are in the Piel stem, reflecting the intensity of the action being taken. Other forms of the word relate the passive meaning, “to be atoned for.” The older usage of this word reflects the basis for later usage with regard to the Mosaic Covenant and the atonement required by God for the Israelites. Jacob “appeased” Esau with a gift (literally, “I will cover his face”; Gen. 32:20). The implication is that Esau would be visually blocked from seeing Jacob’s transgression of twenty years earlier because Jacob was making amends with a gift. Reconciliation was also made by David to the Gibeonites for Saul’s inhumane treatment of them (2 Sam. 21:3).
Most occurrences of kāphar, however, have to do with atoning for sin against God and occur in the priestly ritual sections of the OT. Moses made atonement for the people after their sin of worshiping the golden calf. The LORD forgave the Israelites, but they were severely punished (Exo. 32:30–35). The priests made atonement for the people (Num. 8:19), but first had to be atoned for themselves (Exo. 29; Lev. 8; Num. 8:12). Atonement was made for individuals (Lev. 5:6–16; 19:22); for a house (Lev. 14:53); for the Tent of Meeting (Lev. 16:16). Atonement was usually made on the altar in the Tabernacle (Lev. 16:18).
It has been rightly observed that the word “atone” is a combination of the words “at” and “one,” and that the word “atonement,” therefore, means “at-one-ment.” While the simpler definitions of “reconcile” or “repairing [of a relationship]” do not capture all the theological meaning, these denotations are basically correct and clearly communicate the purpose of the Israelite rituals, as well as a basic function of church services today. Atonement and forgiveness are closely related. Yet, without the ritual of atoning (or, today, the acceptance of Christ’s atoning work for ourselves) forgiveness would not occur.
The theology of the atoning act has to do with purifying so that God may be approached or that someone may live in the proximity of his presence. What actually occurs with regard to a person’s requirements toward God to obtain forgiveness is debated. The three basic theories of what exactly occurs when atonement for sin is made are: covering, ransoming and wiping away. Some elements of each are valuable.
Covering seems to be an attractive option by means of the Arabic cognate being in close agreement. In addition, the earliest references in Genesis denote covering. But these occurrences are also closely tied to the idea of “rubbing,” and whether “rubbing on” or “rubbing off [or away]” is intended is not exactly clear.
The ransoming idea has often been purported picturesquely, because of cognate nouns in Hebrew which mean “ransom” (e.g. HED # 3853). But the problem with this base meaning is the question of to whom the ransom is paid. Leviticus 17:11 prescribes the Israelites making atonement for themselves. Oddly enough, this verse is often quoted in support of the ransom theory. But draining of blood before consumption was always required, regardless of whether the animal was to be used for a sacrifice. Furthermore, there was no ransom for murder (Num. 35:31f).
To wipe away or to cleanse is the third idea which some consider basic to kāphar. The three reasons are that: Jer. 18:23 uses kāphar in parallel to māchāh (HED # 4364), which obviously means “to wipe off” or “to wipe away”; the Hebrew Piel form matches well with the similar verb type in the Akkadian cognate—verses which speak of ritually purifying the Tabernacle. This theory is based on the idea of a secondary root. In other words, the word kāphar, which means “to cover,” is actually a different word than kāphar which means “to atone.” They just happen to sound the same. The likelihood of two such words coming together is improbable. It is impossible to prove and likely stems from arguments against the nuance of “to cover,” rather than a proactive approach.
Blood was necessary for atonement. Indeed, Heb. 9:22 teaches that “without shedding of blood, that there is no remission.” Guilt of sin means death. To atone, therefore, requires payment of lifeblood in exchange for the life of the sinner. Since the life is in the blood (Lev. 17:11), it is the ultimate symbol for the life of the sacrifice which is offered in place of the life of the sinner. There is no magical power in the blood; atoning is a judicial act of substitution, according to God’s prescribed ordinances, which are always ultimately based on his holiness. The good news is that the answer to Israel’s sin problem was a totally new beginning, which God provided for on the Day of Atonement. That day looked ahead to the once-and-for-all offering of Jesus Christ to truly take away the guilt of sin for those who will repent and believe.
BDB 497–98, KB 2:493–94, NIDOT 2:689–711, STRONG <H3722>, TDOT 7:288–303, TWOT 1:452–53.
3853. כֹּפֶר kōpher
noun: bribe, ransom
SYNONYMS
פְּדוּיִם p edhûyim (6543)
פִּדְיוֹם pidhyôm (6547)
שֹׁחַד shōchadh (8245)
Derived from the verb kāphar (HED # 3848), “to make atonement,” this noun occurs thirteen times in the Hebrew Bible. It is attested elsewhere in Semitic only in Samaritan. Kōpher has two basic meanings, as a means of “ransom” or “redemption,” standing in the place of the one punished, and “bribe.”
The noun appears as a technical term for “ransom.” The notion of a monetary amount being able to atone for one’s penalty for a crime is consistent with the semantic range of the verb. The object ransomed is the life of the individual, again a concept which is consonant with the verb. For example, one will suffer death for allowing one’s ox to habitually gore, to the point that a free person is killed by that ox, unless the owner pays a fee to save his own life (Exo. 21:30). This act of negligent homicide is differentiated from willful murder, for which no redemption price can be paid (Num. 35:31f). Further, there was a fee paid as ransom for the lives of those males counted in the census of Moses (Exo. 30:12). The act of census-taking usually had the implication of warfare, rather than merely numbering everyone. Thus, those counted for war needed to be ritually purified for war, for Yahweh was understood to be fighting for the Israelites, and only the ritually pure could come into contact with his presence (see Deut. 20).
The concept is also used in literary contexts. It is rhetorically understood that no one can ransom their lives from Sheol, as all must die (Ps. 49:7). However, Yahweh does ransom the righteous from the brink of Sheol, according to Elihu (Job 33:24). Elihu argued that Job’s crime was severe enough that there was no redemption for it, and that Job must accept the penalty given him (36:18). The redemption of the righteous is possible, and done at the expense of the wicked (Prov. 21:18). Indeed, Yahweh asserts that the ransom paid for Israel was no less than Egypt (Isa. 43:3). This imagery points to the value of the righteous in the eyes of Yahweh.
Finally, the noun is used in the sense of “bribe.” A bribe is in essence ransom, a ransom paid in circumstances where it should not be necessary to do so. Amos sent a scathing criticism to the economic elite of the northern kingdom of Israel, including a condemnation for the rich oppressing the poor through the practice of bribery (Amos 5:12). Proverbs 13:8 suggests that the rich are susceptible to bribes. This action does not occur among the righteous, those who possess true wisdom (6:35). Indeed, in Samuel’s farewell speech, as the nation made a monumental shift in political structure from tribal confederacy to kingship, Samuel established his credibility by rhetorically challenging the crowd to produce any evidence of impropriety on his part, including bribery (1 Sam. 12:3).
BDB 497, KB 2:495, NIDOT 2:689–711, STRONG <H3724>, TDOT 7:288–303, TWOT 1:452–53.