latest Revision, called the Revised Standard Version, where the word used is "expiation.” Why?
However, we find that other translators were not satisfied with rendering Hilasterion as "propitiation” or "expiation." Weymouth translates it truly as "mercy seat.” Fenton also as "mercy seat.” The XX Century as "a means of reconciliation." Ronald Knox likewise as "a means of reconciliation." Goodspeed as "a sacrifice of reconciliation.”
The original idea of the mercy seat in the Tabernacle, placed above the Two Tables of Stone whereon were inscribed the Ten Commandments, was the Divine dwelling place, and thereby is represented the throne of God in the Tabernacle where He would hear prayer and from which He would speak words of comfort. The golden lid of the Ark of the Covenant was evidently intended to picture the seat of God in His attitude of mercy toward the human race. This seat of gold was made suggestive of the overshadowing Presence of God by golden cherubim, one on either side, whose outstretched wings extended over the mercy seat.
The Law was necessary for man's welfare, covering the principles according to which man must live in order to receive heavenly blessing, but by the mercy seat was represented God as the All-Merciful, manifesting the infinite love of God. It did not suggest Jesus in a pleading attitude to God, or His death on the cross as an expiation to God, but God's merciful attitude to man, thus not propitiation, or expiation but the perpetual Divine Mercy, His mercy even in man's failure to keep the Law.
We thus get the idea of Paul in writing, "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them."
Not only in this instance, but everywhere else, the Bible was translated by men affected by the point of view of St, Anselm. They could not see God except as an Avenger of violated law, angry with the wicked and determined to punish them to eternity for breaking Law. It was the idea of legal satisfaction. They did not realize—perhaps did not even think about it—that the punishment for the violation of law is not from God, but the result which follows from that
