SermonIndex

Home
Bible
OUR
Leviticus
Chapter 22

Leviticus 22

Scripture
Sermons
Commentary

¹Adonai spoke to Moses [Drawn out], saying,^a

²“Tell Aaron [Light-bringer] and his sons to separate themselves from the holy things of the children of Israel [God prevails], which they make holy to me, and that they not profane my holy name. I am Adonai .

³“Tell them, ‘If anyone of all your offspring throughout all your generations approaches the holy things, which the children of Israel [God prevails] make holy to Adonai , having his uncleanness on him, that soul shall be cut off from before me. I am Adonai .^b

⁴“‘Whoever of the offspring of Aaron [Light-bringer] is a leper or has an issue; he shall not eat of the holy things, until he is clean. Whoever touches anything that is unclean by the dead, or a man whose offspring goes from him;

⁵or whoever touches any creeping thing, whereby he may be made unclean, or a man of whom he may take uncleanness, whatever uncleanness he has;

⁶the person that touches any such shall be unclean until the evening, and shall not eat of the holy things, unless he bathe his body in water.^c

⁷When the sun is down, he shall be clean; and afterward he shall eat of the holy things, because it is his bread.

⁸That which dies of itself, or is torn by animals, he shall not eat, defiling himself by it. I am Adonai .

⁹“‘They shall therefore follow my requirements, lest they bear sin for it, and die therein, if they profane it. I am Yahweh M'Kaddesham [Yahweh our Santifier / He sustains breathing who makes them holy].^d

¹⁰“‘No stranger shall eat of the holy thing:^e a foreigner living with the priests, or a hired servant, shall not eat of the holy thing.

¹¹But if a priest buys a slave, purchased by his money, he shall eat of it; and such as are born in his house, they shall eat of his bread.^f

¹²If a priest’s daughter is married to an outsider, she shall not eat of the heave offering of the holy things.

¹³But if a priest’s daughter is a widow, or divorced, and has no child, and has teshuvah ·completely returned· to her father’s house, as in her youth, she may eat of her father’s bread: but no stranger shall eat any of it.

¹⁴“‘If a man eats something holy unwittingly, then he shall add the fifth part of its value to it, and shall give the holy thing to the priest.^g

¹⁵The priests shall not profane the holy things of the children of Israel [God prevails], which they offer to Adonai ,

¹⁶and so cause them to bear the iniquity that brings guilt, when they eat their holy things; for I am Yahweh M'Kaddesham [Yahweh our Santifier / He sustains breathing who makes them holy].’” (3)

¹⁷Adonai spoke to Moses [Drawn out], saying,

¹⁸“Speak to Aaron [Light-bringer], and to his sons, and to all the children of Israel [God prevails], and say to them, ‘Whoever is of the house of Israel [God prevails], or of the foreigners in Israel [God prevails], who offers his offering, whether it is any of their vows, or any of their free will offerings, which they offer to Adonai for a burnt offering;

¹⁹that you may be accepted, you shall offer a male without defect, of the bulls, of the sheep, or of the goats.^h

²⁰But whatever has a defect, that you shall not offer; for it shall not be acceptable for you.ⁱ^j

²¹Whoever offers a sacrifice of peace offerings to Adonai to accomplish a vow, or for a free will offering, of the herd or of the flock, it shall be perfect to be accepted. It shall have no defect.

²²Blind, injured, maimed, having a wart, festering, or having a running sore: you shall not offer these to Adonai ,^k^l nor make an offering by fire of them on the altar to Adonai .

²³Either a bull or a lamb that has any deformity or lacking in his parts, that you may offer for a free will offering; but for a vow it shall not be accepted.^mⁿ

²⁴You must not offer to Adonai that which has its testicles bruised, crushed, broken, or cut. You must not do this in your land.^o

²⁵You must not receive any of these from the hand of a foreigner to offer as bread for your God, because their deformity is a defect in them. They shall not be accepted for you.’”

²⁶Adonai spoke to Moses [Drawn out], saying,^p

²⁷“When a bull, or a sheep, or a goat, is born, then it shall remain seven days with its mother; and from the eighth day and thenceforth it shall be accepted for the offering of an offering made by fire to Adonai .^q

²⁸Whether it is a cow or ewe, you shall not kill it and its young both in one day.

²⁹“When you offer a sacrifice of thanksgiving^r to Adonai , you shall sacrifice it so that you may be accepted.^s

³⁰It shall be eaten on the same day; you shall leave none of it until the morning. I am Adonai .

³¹“Therefore you shall keep my mitzvot ·instructions·, and do them. I am Adonai .^t

³²You shall not profane my holy name,^u but I will be made holy among the children of Israel [God prevails]. I am Adonai who makes you holy,

³³who brought you out of the land of Egypt [Abode of slavery], to be your God. I am Adonai .”

Footnotes:

² ^aLev 22:2 (#3.233): T. The Cohenim ·Priests· must separate themselves from the holy things the people of Israel dedicate to Adonai / R. A Cohen ·Priest· who is unclean shall not serve in the offerings / R. Impure, unclean Cohenim ·Priests· must not do service in the Temple

⁴ ^bLev 22:4 (Lev 22:4-9) (#3.234): A Cohen ·Priest· who is unclean shall not eat the holy offerings

⁷ ^cLev 22:7 (Lev 22:4-9) (#3.235): T. An impure, unclean Cohen ·Priest·, following mikvah ·ritual washing, baptism·, must wait until after sundown before eating the sacred offerings / R. An impure, unclean Cohen ·Priest·, following mikvah ·ritual washing, baptism·, must wait until after sundown before returning to service

¹⁰ ^dLev 22:10 (Lev 22:10-16) (#2b.147): An unauthorized person, anyone who is not a Cohen ·Priest·, shall not eat any of the trumah ·holy offerings·

¹⁰ ^eLev 22:10 (Lev 22:10-16) (#2b.148): T. The tenant of a Cohen ·Priest· nor his hired worker shall not eat any of the holy offerings / R. A hired worker or a Jewish bondsman of a Cohen ·Priest· must not eat trumah ·holy offerings·

¹² ^fLev 22:12 (Lev 22:12-13, 22:14-15) (#2b.149): The daughter of a Cohen ·Priest· married to a layman ·non-priest· shall not eat consecrated food that her father and his family do eat

¹⁵ ^gLev 22:15 (Lev 22:14-16) (#1.13): T. When giving a heave offering unto Adonai, you must remove the tithe for the Cohenim ·Priests· and the tithe for Adonai; nothing may be eaten of until this separation happens / T. The non-priest is not to eat the Cohenoh ·Priest’s· portion or tithe / R. Not to eat untithed fruits

²⁰ ^hLev 22:20 (Lev 22:17-25) (#2b.150): Not to vow or dedicate animals with disqualifying blemishes as a sacrifice unto Adonai

²¹ ⁱLev 22:21 (Lev 22:17-25) (#2b.151): T. Every animal offered for peace offering or vow to be sacrificed must be perfect, without blemish / R. To offer only unblemished animals T. Example: Disqualifying blemishes include: blind, injured, mutilated, abnormal growth, festering wound, running sore, or is its genitals that are bruised, crushed, torn, or cut / T. Example: Directive: If a lamb or bull have irregular growth in their limbs, too short or too long, that animal may be given as Voluntary Offering but not in fulfillment of a Vow Offering

²¹ ^jLev 22:21 (Lev 22:17-25) (#2b.152): T. This command is not found in the straightforward text, it is implied / R. Not to inflict a blemish or wound on a vowed or dedicated animal

²² ^kLev 22:22 (Lev 22:17-25) (#2b.153): Not to slaughter animals with disqualifying blemishes as sacrifices

²² ^lLev 22:22 (Lev 22:17-25) (#2b.154): T. This command is not found in the straightforward text, it is implied by the sacrificial procedure / R. Not to burn the choice portions (the fat) from animals with disqualifying blemishes upon the altar

²⁴ ^mLev 22:24 (Lev 22:17-25) (#2b.155): T. Not to sacrifice, vow, or dedicate an animal whose testicles are damaged or removed / R. Not to castrate the male of any species, neither a man, nor a domestic or wild animal, nor a fowl

²⁴ ⁿLev 22:24 (Lev 22:17-25) (#2b.156): T. This command is not found in the straightforward text, it is implied by the sacrificial procedure / R. The Cohenim ·Priests· shall not apply the blood of animals with disqualifying defects on the altar

²⁵ ^oLev 22:25 (Lev 22:17-25) (#2b.157): T. Not to sacrifice an animal with disqualifying defects received from a foreigner / R. Not to sacrifice blemished animals even if offered by non-Jews (Gentiles)

²⁷ ^pLev 22:27 (#2b.158): The sacrificial animals will not be any younger than eight days old

²⁸ ^qLev 22:28 (Lev 22:26-28) (#1.14): Not to slaughter an animal and its young on the same day

²⁹ ^rQuoted in Heb 13:15

³⁰ ^sLev 22:30 (Lev 22:29-30) (#2b.159): T. Not to leave any flesh of the thanksgiving offering, it must be eaten the same day as it is offered / R. Not to leave sacrifices past the time allowed for eating them

³² ^tLev 22:32 (Lev 22:31-33) (#3.236): Not to profane or desecrate the holy name of Adonai

³² ^uLev 22:32 (Lev 22:31-33) (#3.237): To sanctify, set apart, and make holy the Name of Adonai

Adam Clarke
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
John Gill
Keil-Delitzsch
Matthew Henry
Tyndale

Introduction

Of the uncleanness of the priests, by which they were prevented from ministering in holy things, Lev 22:1-5. How they should be cleansed, Lev 22:6, Lev 22:7. The priest must not eat of any animal that had died of itself, or was torn by wild beasts, but must keep God's ordinances, Lev 22:8, Lev 22:9. No stranger, sojourner, nor hired servant shall eat of the holy things, Lev 22:10. A servant bought with money may eat of them, Lev 22:11. Who of the priest's family may not eat of them, Lev 22:12, Lev 22:13. Of improper persons who partake of the holy things unknowingly, Lev 22:14-16. Freewill-offerings, and sacrifices in general, must be without blemish, Lev 22:17-25. The age at which different animals were to be offered to God, Lev 22:26, Lev 22:27. No animal and its young shall be offered on the same day, Lev 22:28. How the sacrifice of thanks-giving was to be offered, Lev 22:29, Lev 22:30. All God's testimonies to be observed, and the reason, Lev 22:31-33.

Verse 2

Speak unto Aaron and to his sons, that they separate themselves - The same subject is continued in this chapter as in the preceding, with this addition, that besides the perfection of the priests, it was indispensably necessary that the sacrifices also should be perfect. In the service of God, according to the law, neither an imperfect offering nor an imperfect offerer could be admitted. What need then of a mediator between a holy God and sinful men! And can we expect that any of our services, however sincere and well-intentioned, can be accepted, unless offered on that living Altar that sanctifies the gift?

Verse 4

Is a leper, or hath a running issue - See the case of the leper treated at large in the notes on Leviticus 13 (note) and Leviticus 14 (note); and for other uncleannesses, see the notes on Leviticus 15 (note).

Verse 10

There shall no stranger eat of the holy thing - For the meaning of the word stranger, see the note on Exo 12:43. The Jews suppose that stranger here means one who has had his ear pierced, (see the note on Exo 21:6), and that sojourner means a servant who is to go free on the Sabbatical year. Neither of these was permitted to eat of the holy things, because they were not properly members of the priest's family, and might go out and defile themselves even with the abominations of the heathen; but the servant or slave that was bought with money, Lev 22:11, might eat of these things, because he was the property of the master for ever. We see that it was lawful, under the Mosaic economy, to have slaves under certain restrictions; but these were taken from among the heathen, and instructed in the true religion: hence we find, as in the above case, that they were reckoned as a part of the priest's own family, and treated as such. They certainly had privileges which did not extend either to sojourners or to hired servants; therefore their situation was incomparably better than the situation of the slaves under different European governments, of whose souls their pitiless possessors in general take no care, while they themselves venture to profess the Christian religion, and quote the Mosaic law in vindication of their system of slavery. How preposterous is such conduct! and how intolerable!

Verse 13

But if the priest's daughter be a widow - and is returned unto her father's house - A widow in Bengal not infrequently returns to her father's house on the death of her husband: the union betwixt her and her own family is never so dissolved as among European nations. Thousands of widows in Bengal, whose husbands die before the consummation of marriage, never leave their parents - Ward.

Verse 14

Then he shall put the fifth part thereof unto it - The holy thing of which he has unknowingly eaten shall be fairly valued, and to this value he shall add one fifth more, and give the whole to the priest.

Verse 20

Whatsoever hath a blemish - The same perfection is required in the sacrifice that was required in the priest; see on Lev 22:2 (note), and the notes on Leviticus 21 (note).

Verse 23

That hath anything superfluous or lacking - The term שרוע sarua signifies any thing extended beyond the usual size, and the term קלוט kalut signifies any thing unusually contracted; and both mean any monstrosity, whether in redundance or defect. Such things, it seems, might be offered for a freewill-offering, because that was not prescribed by the law; God left it to a man's piety and gratitude to offer such additional gifts as he could: what the law required was indispensably necessary, because it pointed out the Gospel economy; but he that made a vow to offer such a sacrifice as the law had not required, could of course bring an imperfect offering. Some contend that the last clause of this verse should be thus read: If thou offer it either for a freewill-offering, or for a vow, it shall not be accepted. It was the opinion of the Jews, and it appears to be correct, that none of these imperfect animals were ever offered on the altar; but the person who made the freewill-offering of such things as he had, sold the animal, and gave its price for the support of the sanctuary.

Verse 24

Bruised, or crushed, or broken, or cut - That is, no bullock or lamb that is injured in any of the above ways, shall be offered unto the Lord.

Verse 25

Their corruption is in them - Viz., they are bruised, crushed, broken, etc.

Verse 27

When a bullock - is brought forth - This is a most unfortunate as well as absurd translation. The creature called an ox is a bull castrated; surely then a bullock was never yet brought forth! The original word שור shor signifies a bull, a bullock, or indeed any thing of the neat kind: here, even common sense required that it should be translated calf; and did I not hold myself sacredly bound to print the text of the common version with scrupulous exactness, I should translate the former clause of this verse thus, and so enter it into the text: When a Calf, or a Lamb, or a Kid is brought forth, instead of, When a bullock, a sheep, or a goat is brought forth, the absurdity of which is glaring. Seven days under the dam - In vindication of the propriety of this precept it may be justly asserted, that the flesh of very young animals is comparatively innutritive, and that animal food is not sufficiently nourishing and wholesome till the animal has arrived at a certain growth, or acquired the perfection of its nature. There is something brutish in eating the young of beast or fowl before the hair and hoofs are perfect in the one, and the feathers and claws in the other. Before this period their flesh is not good for food. See the note on Lev 9:1.

Verse 28

Ye shall not kill it and her young in one day - This precept was certainly intended to inculcate mercy and tenderness of heart; and so the Jews understood it. When it is necessary to take away the lives of innocent animals for the support of our own, we should do it in such a way as not to blunt our moral feelings; and deplore the necessity, while we feel an express gratitude to God for permission, to do it.

Verse 30

Leave none of it until the morrow - See the note on Lev 7:15.

Verse 32

Neither shall ye profane my holy name - God's name is profaned or rendered common when we treat his commands as we often do those of our fellows, when they do not appear to have self-interest to recommend them. He therefore profanes God's holy name who does not both implicitly believe and conscientiously obey all his words and all his precepts. I will be hallowed among the children of Israel - The words children of Israel, בני ישראל beney Yishrael, which so frequently occur, should be translated either the descendants or posterity of Israel, or the people of Israel. The word children has a tendency to beget a false notion, especially in the minds of young people, and lead them to think that children, in the proper sense of the word, i. e., little ones, are meant.

Verse 33

Brought you out of the land of Egypt - By such a series of miraculous interferences, to be your God - to save you from all idolatry, false and superstitious worship, teach you the right way, lead and support you in it, and preserve you to my eternal kingdom and glory. God, infinite in his own perfections, has no need of his creatures; but they need him; and, as a source of endless felicity, he opens himself to all his intelligent offspring.

Introduction

THE PRIESTS IN THEIR UNCLEANNESS. (Lev 22:1-9) Speak unto Aaron and to his sons, that they separate themselves from the holy things--"To separate" means, in the language of the Mosaic ritual, "to abstain"; and therefore the import of this injunction is that the priests should abstain from eating that part of the sacrifices which, though belonging to their order, was to be partaken of only by such of them as were free from legal impurities. that they profane not my holy name in those things which they hallow unto me, &c.--that is, let them not, by their want of due reverence, give occasion to profane my holy name. A careless or irreverent use of things consecrated to God tends to dishonor the name and bring disrespect on the worship of God.

Verse 3

Whosoever he be . . . that goeth unto the holy things--The multitude of minute restrictions to which the priests, from accidental defilement, were subjected, by keeping them constantly on their guard lest they should be unfit for the sacred service, tended to preserve in full exercise the feeling of awe and submission to the authority of God. The ideas of sin and duty were awakened in their breasts by every case to which either an interdict or an injunction was applied. But why enact an express statute for priests disqualified by the leprosy or polluting touch of a carcass [Lev 22:4], when a general law was already in force which excluded from society all persons in that condition? Because priests might be apt, from familiarity, to trifle with religion, and in committing irregularities or sins, to shelter themselves under the cloak of the sacred office. This law, therefore, was passed, specifying the chief forms of temporary defilement which excluded from the sanctuary, that priests might not deem themselves entitled to greater license than the rest of the people; and that so far from being in any degree exempted from the sanctions of the law, they were under greater obligations, by their priestly station, to observe it in its strict letter and its smallest enactments.

Verse 4

wash his flesh with water--Any Israelite who had contracted a defilement of such a nature as debarred him from the enjoyment of his wonted privileges, and had been legally cleansed from the disqualifying impurity, was bound to indicate his state of recovery by the immersion of his whole person in water. Although all ceremonial impurity formed a ground of exclusion, there were degrees of impurity which entailed a longer or shorter period of excommunication, and for the removal of which different rites required to be observed according to the trivial or the malignant nature of the case. A person who came inadvertently into contact with an unclean animal was rendered unclean for a specified period; and then, at the expiry of that term, he washed, in token of his recovered purity. But a leper was unclean so long as he remained subject to that disease, and on his convalescence, he also washed, not to cleanse himself, for the water was ineffectual for that purpose, but to signify that he was clean. Not a single case is recorded of a leper being restored to communion by the use of water; it served only as an outward and visible sign that such a restoration was to be made. The Book of Leviticus abounds with examples which show that in all the ceremonial washings, as uncleanness meant loss of privileges, so baptism with water indicated a restoration to those privileges. There was no exemption; for as the unclean Israelite was exiled from the congregation, so the unclean priest was disqualified from executing his sacred functions in the sanctuary; and in the case of both, the same observance was required--a formal intimation of their being readmitted to forfeited privileges was intimated by the appointed rite of baptism. If any one neglected or refused to perform the washing, he disobeyed a positive precept, and he remained in his uncleanness; he forbore to avail himself of this privilege, and was therefore said to be "cut off" from the presence of the Lord.

Verse 8

dieth of itself--The feelings of nature revolt against such food. It might have been left to the discretion of the Hebrews, who it may be supposed (like the people of all civilized nations) would have abstained from the use of it without any positive interdict. But an express precept was necessary to show them that whatever died naturally or from disease, was prohibited to them by the operation of that law which forbade them the use of any meat with its blood.

Verse 10

WHO OF THE PRIESTS' HOUSE MAY EAT OF THEM. (Lev 22:10-16) There shall no stranger eat the holy thing--The portion of the sacrifices assigned for the support of the officiating priests was restricted to the exclusive use of his own family. A temporary guest or a hired servant was not at liberty to eat of them; but an exception was made in favor of a bought or homeborn slave, because such was a stated member of his household. On the same principle, his own daughter, who married a husband not a priest, could not eat of them. However, if a widow and childless, she was reinstated in the privileges of her father's house as before her marriage. But if she had become a mother, as her children had no right to the privileges of the priesthood, she was under a necessity of finding support for them elsewhere than under her father's roof.

Verse 13

there shall no stranger eat thereof--The interdict recorded (Lev 22:10) is repeated to show its stringency. All the Hebrews, even the nearest neighbors of the priest, the members of his family excepted, were considered strangers in this respect, so that they had no right to eat of things offered at the altar.

Verse 14

if a man eat of the holy thing unwittingly--A common Israelite might unconsciously partake of what had been offered as tithes, first-fruits, &c., and on discovering his unintentional error, he was not only to restore as much as he had used, but be fined in a fifth part more for the priests to carry into the sanctuary.

Verse 15

they shall not profane the holy things of the children of Israel--There is some difficulty felt in determining to whom "they" refers. The subject of the preceding context being occupied about the priests, it is supposed by some that this relates to them also; and the meaning then is that the whole people would incur guilt through the fault of the priests, if they should defile the sacred offerings, which they would have done had they presented them while under any defilement [CALVIN]. According to others, "the children of Israel" is the nominative in the sentence; which thus signifies, the children of Israel shall not profane or defile their offerings, by touching them or reserving any part of them, lest they incur the guilt of eating what is divinely appointed to the priests alone [CALMET].

Verse 19

THE SACRIFICES MUST BE WITHOUT BLEMISH. (Lev. 22:17-33) Ye shall offer at your own will--rather, to your being accepted. a male without blemish--This law (Lev 1:3) is founded on a sense of natural propriety, which required the greatest care to be taken in the selection of animals for sacrifice. The reason for this extreme caution is found in the fact that sacrifices are either an expression of praise to God for His goodness, or else they are the designed means of conciliating or retaining His favor. No victim that was not perfect in its kind could be deemed a fitting instrument for such purposes if we assume that the significance of sacrifices is derived entirely from their relation to Jehovah. Sacrifices may be likened to gifts made to a king by his subjects, and hence the reasonableness of God's strong remonstrance with the worldly-minded Jews (Mal 1:8). If the tabernacle, and subsequently the temple, were considered the palace of the great King, then the sacrifices would answer to presents as offered to a monarch on various occasions by his subjects; and in this light they would be the appropriate expressions of their feelings towards their sovereign. When a subject wished to do honor to his sovereign, to acknowledge allegiance, to appease his anger, to supplicate forgiveness, or to intercede for another, he brought a present; and all the ideas involved in sacrifices correspond to these sentiments--those of gratitude, of worship, of prayer, of confession and atonement [BIB. SAC.].

Verse 23

that mayest thou offer, &c.--The passage should be rendered thus: "if thou offer it either for a freewill offering, or for a vow, it shall not be accepted." This sacrifice being required to be "without blemish" [Lev 22:19], symbolically implied that the people of God were to dedicate themselves wholly with sincere purposes of heart, and its being required to be "perfect to be accepted" [Lev 22:21], led them typically to Him without whom no sacrifice could be offered acceptable to God.

Verse 27

it shall be seven days under the dam--Animals were not considered perfect nor good for food till the eighth day. As sacrifices are called the bread or food of God (Lev 22:25), to offer them immediately after birth, when they were unfit to be eaten, would have indicated a contempt of religion; and besides, this prohibition, as well as that contained in Lev 22:28, inculcated a lesson of humanity or tenderness to the dam, as well as secured the sacrifices from all appearance of unfeeling cruelty. Next: Leviticus Chapter 23

Introduction

INTRODUCTION TO LEVITICUS 22 In this chapter several laws are delivered out, forbidding the priests to eat of holy things, when in any uncleanness, or at any time what dies of itself, or is torn of beasts, Lev 22:1; also showing who belonging to the priests might or might not eat of the holy things, Lev 22:10; and others requiring that whatever offerings were brought by the children, of Israel, they should be perfect and without blemish, Lev 22:17; and also declaring what age a creature should be of when sacrificed, and the time when thank offerings were to be eaten, Lev 22:26; concluding with an exhortation to observe the commands of God, and sanctify him, and not profane his name, Lev 22:31.

Verse 1

And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... Immediately after he had spoken concerning blemishes in priests, and in a continued discourse signifying, that though priests that had blemishes might eat of the holy things, yet neither they, nor even such who had not any, if they were under legal impurity, might eat of them: saying; as follows.

Verse 2

Speak unto Aaron and to his sons,.... The priests; the children of Israel or the common people are not mentioned, as having no concern in the following laws about eating holy things: that they separate themselves from the holy things of the children of Israel; both from offering their lawful sacrifices, which was the business of their office when pure, and chiefly from eating that part of them which was their due, and was allowed them; neither of these they were to do, particularly the latter, when they were in any uncleanness, as the following words show: and that, they profane not my holy name in those things which they hallow unto me; which the children of Israel set apart and devoted to his service; which they would do, by eating their part of them when unclean, and thereby show little reverence to that holy name to which they were devoted; or which the priests themselves sanctified, by offering them to him; for Jarchi says, this takes in the holiness of the priests themselves; but the former seems best, and is confirmed in Lev 22:3, I am the Lord; who is holy himself, and whose holy things these are, and will be sanctified by those that draw nigh unto him.

Verse 3

Say unto them, whosoever he be of all your seed among your generations,.... Whether male or female, in all succeeding ages, as long as the ceremonial law lasted; for females as well as males of the families of the priests ate of the holy things, provided they had no uncleanness on them, but if they had, they might not: that goeth unto the holy things, which the children of Israel hallow unto the Lord: that approaches to any of the sacrifices which the children of Israel have devoted to the Lord, either to offer them, or even to touch them, and particularly to eat of them; and so Jarchi and Ben Gersom observe, that this going or drawing near is no other than eating; for touching only, a man was not guilty of cutting off: having his uncleanness upon him; through a leprosy, or running issue, or touching any unclean person or thing, as the following words explain it: that soul shall be cut off from my presence; excluded from the sanctuary, and the service of it, where the presence of God was; or be removed out of the world by death, either by the civil magistrate, or by the hand of God, by an immediate death, by the pestilence, as the Targum of Jonathan: I am the Lord; that will avenge the breach of such a law, able to inflict such punishment, and faithful to accomplish every word of his, whether in a way of threatening or promise.

Verse 4

What man soever of the seed of Aaron is a leper,.... A young, or an old man, as the Targum of Jonathan, and indeed man or woman; for the wives and daughters of the priests, if in this, and other circumstances following, might not eat of the holy things until cleansed, who otherwise might, see Lev 13:2, or hath a running issue; a gonorrhoea, whether man or woman, Lev 15:2, he shall not eat of the holy things until he be clean; he might eat of the tithes, but not of the wave breast, or heave shoulder: and whoso toucheth any that is unclean by the dead; not only that touched the dead, which made unclean, but that touched any person or thing that was made unclean by it: or a man whose seed goeth from him; involuntarily when asleep, in a dream, and through a lustful imagination; see Lev 15:16.

Verse 5

Or whosoever toucheth any creeping thing, whereby he may be made unclean,.... Jarchi thinks this respects the measure or quantity of what is touched, as if but the quantity of a lentil or small pea, see Lev 11:31, or a man of whom he may take uncleanness, whatsoever uncleanness he hath; as of a leper, a profluvious, or a dead man; Jarchi interprets it of the latter, and of the quantity which defiles, which is that of an olive; who also observes, that the phrase, "whatsoever uncleanness", includes touching a profluvious man or woman, a menstruous woman, and a new mother.

Verse 6

The soul which hath touched any such shall be unclean until even,.... Which is the time fixed by the several laws for such uncleannesses, see Lev 11:31, and shall not eat of the holy things, unless he wash his flesh with water; in forty seahs of water, as the Targum of Jonathan; yea, when the evening is come, he may not eat of the heave or wave offerings, until he has dipped himself all over in water; nor should any eat of the Lord's supper under the New Testament, but such as are first baptized in water.

Verse 7

And when the sun is down he shall be clean,.... Having washed himself in water, otherwise not, though the sun may be set: and shall afterwards eat of the holy things; the families of the priests lived upon: because it is his food: his common food, his ordinary diet, that by which he subsists, having nothing else to live upon; this being the ordination of God, that he which ministered about holy things should live on them; and these being his only substance, in compassion to him they were detained from him no longer than the evening; and this was done, to make him careful how he defiled himself, since thereby he was debarred of his ordinary meals.

Verse 8

That which dieth of itself, or is torn with beasts,.... Whether fowls or beasts, and even clean ones, which, had they been killed in a proper manner, were fit to cut, but dying of themselves, or torn to pieces by other birds or beasts of prey, might not, see Eze 44:31, he shall not eat, to defile himself therewith; being impure food, at least in a ceremonial sense, and not fit to be eaten; these things were forbid a common Israelite, and much less might a priest eat of them, see Lev 17:15, I am the Lord; who enjoin this, and expect to be obeyed.

Verse 9

They shall therefore keep mine ordinance,.... The observance of my word, as the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan, of his word of command; either respecting the not eating of such creatures that died of themselves, or were torn by beasts; or else the not eating holy things in uncleanness, so Jarchi and Gersom; but Aben Ezra thinks the sanctuary is referred to, which was to be kept by the priests, and which seems to agree with what follows: lest they bear sin for it: the sanctuary, by neglecting it, and so be charged with the guilt of sin, and be obliged to bear the punishment of it: and die therefore if they profane it; by going into it in their uncleanness, and eating of the most holy things there when in such circumstances, and die by the hand of God, as Jarchi and Ben Gersom interpret it, as Nadab and Abihu did, and even in like manner, by fire, Lev 10:1; and so the Targum of Jonathan,"lest they die by flaming fire:" I the Lord do sanctify them; the priests, who were separated from others, and devoted to his service, and therefore ought to be holy; or the holy things separated for the use of the priests, but not to be eaten in their uncleanness; the Arabic version renders it, "do sanctify that", the sanctuary, and therefore it should not be profaned, but be kept pure and holy.

Verse 10

There shall no stranger eat of the holy thing,.... Any one of the holy things, as the heave shoulder, wave breast, &c. by a "stranger" is not meant one of another nation; though indeed all such were called strangers, and might not eat of these things, Eph 2:12; but one that was not of the family of a priest, though he might be an Israelite, and even a Levite; anyone that was not of the seed of Aaron, as Aben Ezra; any common man or laic, as the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan, excepting those after mentioned: a sojourner of the priests, or an hired servant, shall not eat of the holy thing: by the former is not intended an Heathen, a proselyte of the gate, one that has renounced idolatry, and so permitted to live among the Israelites, of it uncircumcised, who is often understood by one that sojourneth in the gate, but here an Israelitish sojourner; and so the Targum of Jonathan expressly has it,"a son of an Israelite, who is a sojourner of the priests;''not that is a guest for a short time, or a boarder with him; for if he may not eat of the holy things, what must he live on while with him? but one that dwells in some part of his house: and by the latter is meant anyone that is hired by the day, or week, or year, and when the time is expired is at his liberty; though the Jewish writers commonly, and particularly Jarchi, interpret the sojourner of the servant that has his ear bored, and is bought with money, until the year of jubilee, and serves for ever; and the hireling of one that is purchased for years, and goes out in the sixth year; but the above objection will lie against these.

Verse 11

But if the priest buy any soul with his money, he shall eat of it,.... Whether any of his own nation, who sometimes, when become poor, were obliged to sell themselves; or a stranger, as the Targum of Jonathan; one of another nation, a Canaanitish servant, as Jarchi. Now these being his own purchase, and always to abide with him, became part of his family, and so might eat of the provisions of it; and it is from hence the Jews gather, as Jarchi and Gersom, that his wife might eat of the holy things, because bought with his money; but there is a better reason to be given for that, for of whatever family she was before, whether of the priests or not, by marriage she became a part, yea, a principal of his family, being one flesh with him, bearing the same name, and entitled to all the privileges of his house. This is extended by some Jewish writers (l) to cattle, for by any soul they understood also the soul of a beast, which being bought by the priest's money, might eat of the offerings of the tithes: and he that is born in his house; they shall eat of his meat; whether male or female, as Aben Ezra; these are children of handmaids, as Jarchi, that were bought with his money; and these children being born of them, became his property, and part of his family, and so had a right to the provisions of his house. All this may teach us, that the holy ordinances of the Gospel are not to be administered to strangers, persons destitute of the grace of God, nor to such as are not of the family or church of God, but to such as are bought and redeemed with the blood of Christ, the high priest, and are born again of his Spirit and grace. (l) Misn. Trumot, c. 11. sect. 9. & Maimon. & Bartenora in ib. Hilchot Trumot, c. 6. sect. 1.

Verse 12

If the priest's daughter also be married to a stranger,.... Not to an Heathen, but to any Israelite, that is, a common man, or a layman, as the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan, one that is not a priest; but is married either to a Levite, or an Israelite, as Jarchi: she may not eat of an offering of the holy things; the heave shoulder or wave breast, &c. being removed into another family by marriage, she is not reckoned of her father's family, and so had no more a right to eat of the holy things.

Verse 13

But if the priest's daughter be a widow or divorced,.... If her husband be dead, or if living, and she is put away by him, whether a Levite, or an Israelite: and have no child: by him, as the Targum of Jonathan and Jarchi add, nor is with child by him: and is returned to her father's house, as in her youth, she shall eat of her father's meat; not of all, or any part, only of some, of the heave offering, but not of the shoulder or breast, which is the tradition of the wise men, as Maimonides (m) relates. There are two cases in this affair excepted by them, which they suppose are implied in this clause; the one is, if she is detained and reserved for her husband's brother, according to the law in Deu 25:5; she being without children; and so the Targum of Jonathan adds,"and is not kept or reserved for her husband's brother,''which is implied by her being returned to her father's house; and the other is, if she is with child; for though she had no children by her husband, yet if she is pregnant, that made her unlawful to eat of the holy things; for then she is not as in her youth (n). The Jewish canon concerning such a person runs thus (o); the daughter of a priest, married to an Israelite, may not eat of the heave offering; if he dies, and she has a son by him, she may not eat of the heave offering; if she is married to a Levite, she may eat of the tithes: if he dies, and she has a son by him, she may eat of the tithes: if she is married to a priest, she may eat of the heave offering; if he dies, and she has a son by him, she may eat of the heave offering; if her son by the priest dies, she may not eat of the heave offering; if her son by the Levite dies, she may not eat of the tithes; if her son by an Israelite, she may return to her father's house, as it is said Lev 22:13, but there shall no stranger eat thereof; as not anyone of another nation, so not anyone of another family beside the priest's, no, not the son of a priest's daughter by an Israelite, which some think is principally intended; and so Aben Ezra remarks this is said of a son, if she had any, and upon whose account she herself might not eat. (m) In Misn. Yebamot, c. 9. sect. 6. (n) Misn Yebamot, c. 7. sect. 4. & Bartenora in ib. (o) Misn. Yebamot, c. 9. sect. 6.

Verse 14

And if a man eat of the holy thing unwittingly,.... Either not knowing that it is an holy thing, or the heave offering, or any thing of that kind; or else is ignorant of the punishment of such an action, as Gersom observes; and this is to be understood of any man that was not a priest, or was not of the priest's family, even any common Israelite; so the Targum of Jonathan, a man of Israel, or an Israelite, one of the common people: then he shall put a fifth part thereof unto it; a fifth part of the value of what he has eaten, to an equivalent for the whole, that is, he shall pay the full value for what he has eaten, and a fifth part besides: and shall give it to the priest with the holy thing; the meaning is, that he shall give the fifth part to the priest, with the equivalent for what he has eaten; for he could not give the holy thing itself, but a compensation for it; according to Gersom, he was to give the principal to the priest, whose the holy thing was he ate of, and the fifth part he might give to what priest he would. The Jewish canon, concerning this matter, runs thus; he that ignorantly eats the heave offering pays the principal, and the fifth part; and the same, either he that eats, or drinks, or anoints; and whether the heave offering be clean or unclean, he pays the fifth, and the fifth of the fifth; and he does not pay the heave offering but of common things, rightly ordered, and they become an heave offering, and the compensation of it; and if the priest would forgive, he may not (p). (p) Misn. Trumot, c. 6. sect. 1.

Verse 15

And they shall not profane the holy things of the children of Israel, which they offer unto the Lord. By causing or suffering strangers to eat of them; so Jarchi, referring the words to the priests, who should be careful that strangers ate not of sacred things; or by the strangers themselves eating them, whereby they were profaned and used as common things. And they shall not profane the holy things of the children of Israel, which they offer unto the Lord. By causing or suffering strangers to eat of them; so Jarchi, referring the words to the priests, who should be careful that strangers ate not of sacred things; or by the strangers themselves eating them, whereby they were profaned and used as common things. Leviticus 22:16 lev 22:16 lev 22:16 lev 22:16Or suffer them to bear the iniquity of trespass,.... The punishment of sin: either the strangers: when they eat their holy things; the holy things belonging to the priests, which they permitting them to do, suffer them to be liable to the punishment incurred thereby, or else the priests themselves; so the Septuagint version renders the word "themselves"; and in like manner Jarchi interprets it; and then the sense may be, according to the Targums of Jonathan and Onkelos, that the priests shall bear the punishment of their sins,"when they shall eat the holy things in uncleanness,''which is what is forbidden them in the former part of the chapter; but this seems to be too remote; rather the former sense is best: for I the Lord do sanctify them; both the priests, to whom the holy things belong, and the holy things for their use, and the use of their families, and them only.

Verse 16

And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... At the same time; for having said many things concerning the holiness of priests, whose business it was to offer sacrifices, he adds various things concerning the nature, condition, and circumstances of the sacrifices they were to offer: saying, as follows.

Verse 17

Speak unto Aaron, and to his sons,.... The priests, whose work it was to offer sacrifices, and therefore it behoved them to know what kind and sort were to be offered by them, when brought to them: and unto all the children of Israel: who were to bring the sacrifices, and for whom they were to be offered, and therefore should be acquainted with the nature and kind of what would be acceptable to God, and what not: and say unto them, whatsoever he be of the house of Israel; this phrase includes women and servants, and even Gentiles, as say the Jewish writers (q), who may vow vows, and make voluntary gifts, as well as the Israelites: or of the strangers in Israel: those of other nations that dwelt there, either proselytes of the gate, or proselytes of righteousness, so Ben Gersom; and Aben Ezra observes, that the text speaks of the stranger, because there is some reason in the vows and freewill offerings of an Israelite and stranger, as follows: that will offer his oblation for all his vows, and for all his freewill offerings, which they will offer unto the Lord for a burnt offering; the wise men, as Aben Ezra observes, distinguish between a vow and a freewill offering; every vow is a freewill offering, but every freewill offering is not a vow; and though these were both of them sorts of peace offerings, yet they were not received from Gentiles under that notion, but as burnt offerings, because they were offered in devotion to God, and not to be eaten by Israelites; so Maimonides (r) says, they do not receive from Gentiles but burnt offerings only, as it is said Lev 22:25, "neither from a stranger's hand", &c. even burnt offerings of fowls they receive from a Gentile, though he be an idolater; but they do not receive of them peace offerings, nor meat offerings, nor sin offerings, nor trespass offerings; and so burnt offerings, which do not come by way of a vow, or a freewill offering, they do not receive from Gentiles, as the burnt offering of a new mother and the like unto it; a Gentile that brings peace offerings, they offer them as burnt offerings, because the heart of the Gentile is towards heaven. (q) T. Bab. Cholin, fol. 13. 2. Bartenora in Misn. Shekalim, c. 1. sect. 5. (r) Hilchot Maaseh Hakorbanot, c. 3. sect. 2, 3.

Verse 18

Ye shall offer at your own will,.... For vows and freewill offerings were at their own option, and depended on their own will and pleasure, and when offered should be with a willing mind, and from their whole heart: or "for good will to you"; as the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan; or for gracious, acceptation, that is, that they might be well pleasing to God, and acceptable in his sight, so Jarchi; in order to which the following direction was strictly to be observed: a male without blemish, of the beeves, of the sheep, and of the goats; bullocks, sheep, and goats, were the only sorts of beasts, out of which sacrifices were taken, and those that were for burnt offerings were always to be males, and unblemished, see Lev 1:3; but for other offerings, as peace offerings and sin offerings, females might be used, see Lev 3:1. Fowls are not mentioned, though burnt offerings were of them, because it was not required in them, only of beasts, that they should be males, and without blemish; for, as Jarchi observes, these were not rejected on account of a blemish, only for want of a member.

Verse 19

For whatsoever hath a blemish, that shall ye not offer,.... Which is the general rule, the particulars of which are after given, and which has been imitated by the Heathens. The Egyptians, as they only sacrificed the males of beeves, so they were very curious in examining them, that they might be entirely pure and perfect (s); and it was a custom among the Romans, that such sheep should be chosen for sacrifice, in which there was nothing wanting (t); and so, among the Grecians, Homer (u) speaks of perfect goats offered in sacrifice to appease the gods: for it shall not be acceptable for you; be grateful to God, and accepted by him on their account, if blemished; see Mal 1:13. (s) Heredot. Euterpe, sive, l. 2. c. 38. (t) Servius in Virgil. Aeneid. l. 4. (u) Iliad. 1. ver. 66.

Verse 20

And whosoever offereth a sacrifice of peace offering unto the Lord,.... This, as Ben Gersom observes, is distinguished from a burnt offering; for though it was to be perfect, and without blemish, yet not obliged to be a male as that, Lev 3:1. This was either by way of thanksgiving for mercies received, Lev 7:12, or to accomplish his vow; made in any distress, that if God would deliver him, then he would offer such a sacrifice: or a freewill offering; either on account of favours received, or in order to obtain them: which sacrifice, whether in beeves or sheep; whether in bullocks or sheep, under which are comprehended goats, both being of the flock, Lev 22:19, it shall be perfect to be accepted; perfect in all its parts, not only in those that are without and obvious to view, but in those that are within: wherefore the Jewish writers say (w), if it had but one kidney, or the spleen was consumed, it was unfit for the altar; wherefore, in order to be an acceptable sacrifice to God, it was to be complete in all respects: there shall be no blemish therein; which is repeated for the confirmation of it, and that it might be observed. Such sacrifices were typical of Christ, the immaculate Lamb of God, who offered himself without spot to him, Pe1 1:19; and shows that no sacrifice of man's can be so acceptable to God as to atone for him, since none of theirs are perfect, and without blemish. (w) Maimon. Hilchot Issure Mizbeach, c. 2. sect. 11.

Verse 21

Blind, or broken, or maimed,.... Which is "blind" of one eye, or both: and so the Egyptians, as they would not sacrifice any of their oxen that had any blemishes on them, and were of a different colour, or changed in their form, so likewise such that were deprived of either of their eyes (x). Some, as Aben Ezra observes, restrain that which is "broken" to its being broken in the head; but others interpret it of any fracture of the foot, as well as the head, and even of the tail, side, or rib; though others think, that such fractures as were not open and visible are excepted, as that of the rib; so Gersom; and with the Heathens, as Pliny (y) would have remarked, as they were not used to sacrifice calves, brought on men's shoulders, so neither anything that halted: that which is maimed some understand of that whose foot is broken, as Aben Ezra also remarks; but the word is by the Septuagint rendered, "cut in the tongue"; and the Targum of Jonathan, "whose eyebrows are smitten"; and Jarchi seems to take in both, interpreting it the eyebrow which is cut or broken, and so the lip, which is cut or broken: but it is rather to be understood more generally of its being maimed or mutilated in any part of it; so with the Heathens, as Porphyry (z) affirms, beasts that were mutilated were not to be sacrificed; and in the Comedian (a), a sacrifice is objected to, because it had no tail; upon which the Scholiast observes, that whatever was mutilated was not offered in sacred services, nor was any thing imperfect or unsound sacrificed to the gods; and particularly Servius (b) remarks, if their tongues were cut or slit; which illustrates the Septuagint version, which is observed by Grotius: or having a wen: or full of warts, as others; the Targum of Jonathan is, whose eyes are smitten with a mixture of white and black; and so Gersom interprets it of a like defect in the eye, in the white of the eye; for he says, if it was in the black or pupil of the eye, the eye would be blind: or scurvy or scabbed: the same of those in men; See Gill on Lev 21:20, ye shall not offer these unto the Lord; any creatures defective in any of these instances; three times this is said, as Jarchi observes, to make them careful concerning the sanctification of them, and concerning the slaying of them, and concerning the sprinkling of their blood: nor make an offering by fire of them upon the altar unto the Lord; a burnt offering on the altar of burnt offering, or burn the fat of them upon it. (x) Chaeremon. apud Porphyr. de Abstinentia, l. 4. sect. 7. (y) Nat. Hist. l. 8. c. 45. (z) De Abstinentia, l. 2. sect. 23. (a) Aristoph. Acharnens. ver. 784. (b) In Virgil. Aeneid. l. 6.

Verse 22

Either a bullock, or a lamb that hath anything superfluous, or lacking in its parts,.... That has either more members than it should have, as five feet, or two gristles in an ear, as Gersom says, or has fewer than it should have; or, as Jarchi, that has one member longer or shorter than another, as the leg or thigh; according to the Targum of Jonathan, that is redundant in its testicles, or deficient therein; the Septuagint version is, that hath its ear or its tail cut; and so the Vulgate Latin version: that mayest thou offer for a freewill offering: for the repair of the sanctuary or temple, as Jarchi and Gersom; money, or the value of the sacrifices, might be given to the priests for that use, but according to them might not be offered upon the altar: but it rather seems to be an exception to the above law, and allows of the sacrifice of them for freewill offering, though not for a vow, as it follows but for a vow it shall not be accepted; because the other was according to a man's will and pleasure, and he might bring what he would on that account; but when he made a vow that he would offer such a sacrifice, it must be of creatures that were perfect, and without blemish.

Verse 23

Ye shall not offer unto the Lord that which bruised, or crushed, or broken, or cut,.... The Targum of Jonathan is, whose testicles are pressed and bruised, and whose nerves are corrupted and bruised, and so most Jewish writers interpret it: neither shall you make any offering thereof in your land; any offering of any sort, either burnt offering or peace offering, or any other; or ye shall not do, that is, any such thing as here suggested, not bruise, or crush, or break, or cut the testicles of any creature; so the above writers.

Verse 24

Neither from a stranger's hand shall ye offer the bread of your God of any of these,.... That is, from a Gentile, a proselyte of the gate, who had renounced idolatry, and was willing to offer sacrifice to the true God; but what had such defects and blemishes in them as before described the priest might not take of his hands, and offer on the altar of God; and this is the rather observed, because on the one hand the Gentile might think such sacrifices would be acceptable, since he might have been used to offer such to idols; and on the other hand, the priest might think such would do well enough for Gentiles, though not for Israelites: because their corruption is in them; or they are corrupt through being bruised, crushed, broken, or cut: and blemishes be in them; which seems to be added to explain the former, and may have respect to all the blemishes before named, and whatsoever is included in them; for though there are but here mentioned, the Jews reckon no less than fifty (c): they shall not be accepted for you; to make atonement for you; Jarchi says, or "from you", the priests; they shall not be accepted of the Lord from their hands, and so be of no avail to the offerers, nor to those for whom they are offered. (c) Maimon. Hilchot Biath Hamikdash, c. 7. sect. 1, &c.

Verse 25

And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... At the same time, as before, in a continued discourse, the subject being of the same kind, relating to sacrifices: saying, as follows.

Verse 26

When a bullock, or a sheep, or a goat, is brought forth,.... Those three are only mentioned, because they were only made use of in sacrifice, to which this law refers: then it shall be seven days under the dam; whether a calf, or a lamb, or a kid of the goats; it was not to be taken from its dam and killed, either for food or sacrifice, before it was seven days old: Fagius says, the Hebrews give two reasons why a creature might not be offered before the eighth day; one is, that a sabbath might pass over it, nothing being perfect and consistent without it, that giving, as they say (d) perfection and consistence to all the things of the world; and the other, as the heavens and the earth being perfected in seven days, a creature which lives so long seems to be, as it were, perfect; but he observes, if we inquire after the mystical sense of it, a better reason is to be given, namely, that Christ, the type of all the sacrifices, was not to be offered, or suffer death in his infancy, which Herod contrived, but at man's estate; and to show that no man is fit to be a propitiatory sacrifice, through weakness and inability, being unable to stand before the justice of God, only Christ, in whom is perfection of strength: and from the eighth day and thenceforth it shall be accepted for an offering made by fire unto the Lord; become an acceptable burnt offering to God; so Pliny (e) says, that the young of sheep are fit for sacrifice on the eighth day, and of an ox on the thirtieth day; see Exo 22:30. (d) Tzerer Hammor, fol. 104. 2. (e) Nat. Hist. l. 8. c. 51.

Verse 27

And whether it be cow or ewe,.... Or "an ox or sheep" (f), for this law, as Aben Ezra says, respects both male and female, and neither the one nor the other with their young might be slain; though Jarchi says, the custom is concerning the female, for it is forbidden to slay the dam and its son, or daughter; but it is not the custom concerning males, wherefore it is lawful to slay the father and the son: ye shall not kill it and her young both in one day; or, "it and its son" (g), the young, whether of a cow or ewe, and whether it be male or female; though Gersom observes, that this law takes place only in the dam and its female young, and not in the father and the son; for it is not manifest, in many animals, who is their father, wherefore he is not guilty of stripes, if the father and his son are slain in one day, even though it is known it is its father: the reason of the law seems to be, to encourage mercy and pity, and to discourage cruelty: hence the Targum of Jonathan is,"and my people, the children of Israel, as our Father is merciful in heaven, so be ye merciful on earth: a cow, or a sheep, &c.'' (f) "bovem vel pecus", Pagninus, Montanus, &c. (g) "ipsum et filium ejus", Pagninus, Montanus, &c.

Verse 28

And when ye will offer a sacrifice of thanksgiving unto the Lord,.... Which was a sort of peace offering, distinct from freewill offerings and vows before spoken of: offer it at your own will; just what they pleased, whether a bullock, a sheep, or a goat, and whether a male or female; these were left to their own option, or for acceptation to you, as the Targum of Jonathan, and so Jarchi; that is, it was right in them, and they ought to be careful to offer it in such manner, that it might be acceptable to God, by observing the rules given concerning it, particularly what follows.

Verse 29

On the same day it shall be eaten up,.... Which is the law concerning it; See Gill on Lev 7:15, ye shall leave none of it till the morning; of another day, as the Vulgate Latin version adds, and much less the fat of them, and the most holy things, as Ben Gersom observes, the one being to be burnt upon the altar, the other to be eaten by the priests I am the Lord; who has made this law, and expect it will be observed.

Verse 30

Therefore shall ye keep my commandments, and do them,.... Both priests and people, even all the commandments delivered at this time, as well as all others; these they were to observe and take notice of, and keep them in memory, and put them in practice: I am the Lord; See Gill on Lev 22:30.

Verse 31

Neither shall ye profane my holy name,.... By transgressing the laws of God, particularly by offering blemished sacrifices, or before the proper tithe; or by slaying the dam and its young on one day; for, as Aben Ezra observes, this is said to the sons of Aaron: but I will be hallowed among the children of Israel; by his priests among them, and by themselves, conforming to all the precepts, and particularly the last mentioned, which respects them, and their eating up the peace offerings the same day: I am the Lord which hallowed you; had separated them from all other people, and had given them holy laws to walk by, through the observance of which they would be at least externally holy.

Verse 32

That brought you out of the land of Egypt, to be your God,.... Whereby he showed himself to be their covenant God and Father, who had a kind and gracious regard unto them, and which laid them under obligation to fear, serve, and worship him as their God: I am the Lord; that hath sovereign right unto them, and claim upon them, and therefore they ought to be subject to his will, and observe his laws ordinances. Next: Leviticus Chapter 23

Verse 1

Reverence for Things Sanctified. - The law on this matter was, (1) that no priest who had become unclean was to touch or eat them (Lev 22:2-9), and (2) that no one was to eat them who was not a member of a priestly family (Lev 22:10-16). Lev 22:2-3 Aaron and his sons were to keep away from the holy gifts of the children of Israel, which they consecrated to Jehovah, that they might not profane the holy name of Jehovah by defiling them הנּזר with מן to keep away, separate one's self from anything, i.e., not to regard or treat them as on a par with unconsecrated things. The words, "which they sanctify to Me," are a supplementary apposition, added as a more precise definition of the "holy things of the children of Israel;" as the expression "holy things" was applied to the holy objects universally, including the furniture of the tabernacle. Here, however, the reference is solely to the holy offerings or gifts, which were not placed upon the altar, but presented to the Lord as heave-offerings and wave-offerings, and assigned by Him to the priests as the servants of His house, for their maintenance (Num 18:11-19, Num 18:26-29). None of the descendants of Aaron were to approach these gifts, which were set apart for them, - i.e., to touch them either for the purpose of eating, or making them ready for eating, - whilst any uncleanness was upon them, on pain of extermination. Lev 22:4-5 No leper was to touch them (see Lev 13:2), or person with gonorrhaea (Lev 15:2), until he was clean; no one who had touched a person defiled by a corpse (Lev 19:28; Num 19:22), or whose seed had gone from him (Lev 15:16, Lev 15:18); and no one who had touched an unclean creeping animal, or an unclean man. טמאתו לכל, as in Lev 5:3, a closer definition of לו יטמא אשׁר, "who is unclean to him with regard to (on account of) any uncleanness which he may have." Lev 22:6-7 "A soul which touches it," i.e., any son of Aaron, who had touched either an unclean person or thing, was to be unclean till the evening, and then bathe his body; after sunset, i.e., when the day was over, he became clean, and could eat of the sanctified things, for they were his food. Lev 22:8-9 In this connection the command given to all the Israelites, not to eat anything that had fallen down dead or been torn in pieces (Lev 17:15-16), is repeated with special reference to the priests. (On. Lev 22:9, see Lev 8:35; Lev 18:30, and Lev 19:17). יחלּלהוּ, "because they have defiled it (the sanctified thing)." Lev 22:10-16 No stranger was to eat a sanctified thing. זר is in general the non-priest, then any person who was not fully incorporated into a priestly family, e.g., a visitor or day-labourer (cf. Exo 12:49), who were neither of them members of his family. Lev 22:11 On the other hand, slaves bought for money, or born in the house, became members of his family and lived upon his bread; they were therefore allowed to eat of that which was sanctified along with him, since the slaves were, in fact, formally incorporated into the nation by circumcision (Gen 17:12-13). Lev 22:12-13 So again the daughter of a priest, if she became a widow, or was put away by her husband, and returned childless to her father's house, and became a member of his family again, just as in the days of her youth, might eat of the holy things. But if she had any children, then after the death of her husband, or after her divorce, she formed with them a family of her own, which could not be incorporated into the priesthood, of course always supposing that her husband was not a priest. Lev 22:14-16 But if any one (i.e., a layman) should eat unawares of that which was sanctified, he was to bring it, i.e., an equivalent for it, with the addition of a fifth as a compensation for the priest; like a man who had sinned by unfaithfulness in relation to that which was sanctified (Lev 5:16). - In the concluding exhortation in Lev 22:15 and Lev 22:16, the subject to יחלּלוּ (profane) and השּׂאוּ (bear) is indefinite, and the passage to be rendered thus: "They are not to profane the sanctified gifts of the children of Israel, what they heave for the Lord (namely, by letting laymen eat of them), and are to cause them (the laymen) who do this unawares to bear a trespass-sin (by imposing the compensation mentioned in Lev 22:14), if they eat their (the priests') sanctified gifts." Understood in this way, both verses furnish a fitting conclusion to the section Lev 22:10-14. On the other hand, according to the traditional interpretation of these verses, the priesthood is regarded as the subject of the first verb, and a negative supplied before the second. Both of these are arbitrary and quite indefensible, because Lev 22:10-14 do not refer to the priests but to laymen, and in the latter case we should expect אליהם ישׂאוּ רלא (cf. Lev 22:9) instead of the unusual אותם השּׂאוּ.

Verse 17

Acceptable Sacrifices. - Lev 22:18-20. Every sacrifice offered to the Lord by an Israelite or foreigner, in consequence of a vow or as a freewill-offering (cf. Lev 7:16), was to be faultless and male, "for good pleasure to the offerer" (cf. Lev 1:3), i.e., to secure for him the good pleasure of God. An animal with a fault would not be acceptable.

Verse 21

Every peace-offering was also to be faultless, whether brought "to fulfil a special (important) vow" (cf. Num 15:3, Num 15:8 : פּלּא, from פּלא to be great, distinguished, wonderful), or as a freewill gift; that is to say, it was to be free from such faults as blindness, or a broken limb (from lameness therefore: Deu 15:21), or cutting (i.e., mutilation, answering to חרוּם Lev 21:18), or an abscess (יבּלת, from יבל to flow, probably a flowing suppurating abscess).

Verse 23

As a voluntary peace-offering they might indeed offer an ox or sheep that was רקלוּט שׂרוּע, "stretched out and drawn together," i.e., with the whole body or certain limbs either too large or too small; (Note: In explanation of these words Knobel very properly remarks, that with the Greeks the sacrificial animal was required to be ἀφελής (Pollux i. 1, 26), upon which Hesychius observes, μήτε πλεονάζων μήτε δέων τι τοῦ σώματος.) but such an animal could not be acceptable as a votive offering.

Verse 24

Castrated animals were not to be sacrificed, nor in fact to be kept in the land at all. מעוּך compressus, θλιβίας, an animal with the stones crushed; כּתוּת contusus, θλασίας, with them beaten to pieces; נתוּק avulsus, σπάδων, with them twisted off; כּרוּי excisus, τομίας or ἐκτομίας, with them cut off. In all these different ways was the operation performed among the ancients (cf. Aristot. hist. an. ix. 37, 3; Colum. vi. 26, vii. 11; Pallad. vi. 7). "And in your land ye shall not make," sc., וגו מעוּך, i.e., castrated animals, that is to say, "not castrate animals." This explanation, which is the one given by Josephus (Ant. iv. 8, 40) and all the Rabbins, is required by the expression "in your land," which does not at all suit the interpretation adopted by Clericus and Knobel, who understand by עשׂה the preparation of sacrifices, for sacrifices were never prepared outside the land. The castration of animals is a mutilation of God's creation, and the prohibition of it was based upon the same principle as that of mixing heterogeneous things in Lev 19:19.

Verse 25

Again, the Israelites were not to accept any one of all these, i.e., the faulty animals described, as sacrifice from a foreigner. "For their corruption is in them," i.e., something corrupt, a fault, adheres to them; so that such offerings could not procure good pleasure towards them. - In Lev 22:26-30 three laws are given of a similar character.

Verse 27

A young ox, sheep, or goat was to be seven days under its mother, and could only be sacrificed from the eighth day onwards, according to the rule laid down in Exo 22:29 with regard to the first-born. The reason for this was, that the young animal had not attained to a mature and self-sustained life during the first week of its existence. (Note: For this reason the following rule was also laid down by the Romans: Suis faetus sacrificio die quinto purus est, pecoris die octavo, bovis tricesimo (Plin. h. n. 8, 51).) This maturity was not reached till after the lapse of a week, that period of time sanctified by the creation. There is no rule laid down in the law respecting the age up to which an animal was admissible in sacrifice. Bullocks, i.e., steers or young oxen of more than a year old, are frequently mentioned and prescribed for the festal sacrifices (for the young ox of less than a year old is called עגל; Lev 9:3), viz., as burnt-offerings in Lev 23:18; Num 7:15, Num 7:21, Num 7:27, Num 7:33, Num 7:39.; Num 8:8; Num 15:24; Num 28:11, Num 28:19, Num 28:27; Num 29:2, Num 29:8, and as sin-offerings in Lev 4:3, Lev 4:14; Lev 16:3; - sheep (lambs) of one year old are also prescribed as burnt-offerings in Lev 9:3; Lev 12:6; Lev 23:12; Exo 29:38; Num 6:14; Num 7:17, Num 7:21, Num 7:27, Num 7:33, Num 7:39., Num 28:3, Num 28:9, Num 28:19, Num 28:27; Num 29:2, Num 29:8, Num 29:13, Num 29:17., as peace-offerings in Num 7:17, Num 7:23; Num 29:35., and as trespass-offerings in Num 6:12; also a yearling ewe as a sin-offering in Lev 14:10 and Num 6:14, and a yearling goat in Num 15:27. They generally brought older oxen or bullocks for peace-offerings (Num 7:17; Num 23:29.), and sometimes as burnt-offerings. In Jdg 6:25 an ox of seven years old is said to have been brought as a burnt-offering; and there can be no doubt that the goats and rams presented as sin-offerings and trespass-offerings were more than a year old.

Verse 28

The command not to kill an ox or sheep at the same time as its young is related to the law in Exo 23:19 and Deu 22:6-7, and was intended to lay it down as a duty on the part of the Israelites to keep sacred the relation which God had established between parent and offspring. - In Lev 22:29, Lev 22:30, the command to eat the flesh of the animal on the day on which it was offered (Lev 7:15; Lev 19:5-6) is repeated with special reference to the praise-offering.

Verse 31

Concluding exhortation, as in Lev 18:29; Lev 19:37. (On Lev 22:32, cf. Lev 18:21 and Lev 11:44-45.)

Introduction

In this chapter we have divers laws concerning the priests and sacrifices all for the preserving of the honour of the sanctuary. I. That the priests should not eat the holy things in their uncleanness (Lev 22:1-9). II. That no stranger who did not belong to some family of the priests should eat of the holy things (Lev 22:10-13), and, if he did it unwittingly, he must make restitution, (Lev 22:14-16). III. That the sacrifices which were offered must be without blemish (Lev 22:17-25). IV. That they must be more than eight days old (Lev 22:26-28), and that the sacrifices of thanksgiving must be eaten the same day they were offered (Lev 22:29, etc.).

Verse 1

Those that had a natural blemish, though they were forbidden to do the priests' work, were yet allowed to eat of the holy things: and the Jewish writers say that "to keep them from idleness they were employed in the wood-room, to pick out that which was worm-eaten, that it might not be used in the fire upon the altar; they might also be employed in the judgment of leprosy:" but, I. Those that were under any ceremonial uncleanness, which possibly they contracted by their own fault, might no so much as eat of the holy things while they continued in their pollution. 1. Some pollutions were permanent, as a leprosy or a running issue, Lev 22:4. These separated the people from the sanctuary, and God would show that they were so far from being more excusable that really they were more abominable in a priest. 2. Others were more transient, as the touching of a dead body, or any thing else that was unclean, from which, after a certain time, a man was cleansed by bathing his flesh in water, Lev 22:6. But whoever was thus defiled might not eat of the holy things, under pain of God's highest displeasure, who said, and ratified the saying, That soul shall be cut off from my presence, Lev 22:3. Our being in the presence of God, and attending upon him, will be so far from securing us that it will but the more expose us to God's wrath, if we dare to draw nigh to him in our uncleanness. The destruction shall come from the presence of the Lord (Th2 1:9), as the fire by which Nadab and Abihu died came from before the Lord. Thus those who profane the holy word of God will be cut off by that word which they make so light of; it shall condemn them. They are again warned of their danger if they eat the holy thing in their uncleanness (Lev 22:9), lest they bear sin, and die therefore. Note, (1.) Those contract great guilt who profane sacred things, by touching them with unhallowed hands. Eating the holy things signified an interest in the atonement; but, if they ate of them in their uncleanness, they were so far from lessening their guilt that they increased it: They shall bear sin. (2.) Sin is a burden which, if infinite mercy prevent not, will certainly sink those that bear it: They shall die therefore. Even priests may be ruined by their pollutions and presumptions. II. As to the design of this law we may observe, 1. This obliged the priests carefully to preserve their purity, and to dread every thing that would defile them. The holy things were their livelihood; if they might not eat of them, how must they subsist? The more we have to lose of comfort and honour by our defilement, the more careful we should be to preserve our purity. 2. This impressed the people with a reverence for the holy things, when they saw the priests themselves separated from them (as the expression is, Lev 22:2) so long as they were in their uncleanness. He is doubtless a God of infinite purity who kept his immediate attendants under so strict a discipline. 3. This teaches us carefully to watch against all moral pollutions, because by them we are unfitted to receive the comfort of God's sanctuary. Though we labour not under habitual deformities, yet actual defilements deprive us of the pleasure of communion with God; and therefore he that is washed needeth to wash his feet (Joh 13:10), to wash his hands, and so to compass the altar, Psa 26:6. Herein we have need to be jealous over ourselves, lest (as it is observably expressed here) we profane God's holy name in those things which we hallow unto him, Lev 22:2. If we affront God in those very performances wherein we pretend to honour him, and provoke him instead of pleasing him, we shall make up but a bad account shortly; yet thus we do if we profane God's name, by doing that in our uncleanness which pretends to be hallowed to him.

Verse 10

The holy things were to be eaten by the priests and their families. Now, I. Here is a law that no stranger should eat of them, that is, no person whatsoever but the priests only, and those that pertained to them, Lev 22:10. The priests are charged with this care, not to profane the holy things by permitting the strangers to eat of them (Lev 22:15) or suffer them to bear the iniquity of trespass (Lev 22:16); that is, suffer them to bring guilt upon themselves, by meddling with that which they have no right to. Thus it is commonly understood. Note, We must not only be careful that we do not bear iniquity ourselves, but we must do what we can to prevent others bearing it. We must not only not suffer sin to lie upon our brother, but, if we can help it, we must not suffer it to come upon him. But perhaps there is another meaning of those words: the priests' eating the sin-offerings is said to signify their bearing the iniquity of the congregation, to make an atonement for them, Lev 10:17. Let not a stranger therefore eat of that holy thing particularly, and so pretend to bear the iniquity of trespass; for it is daring presumption for any to do that, but such as are appointed to do it. Those that set up other mediators besides Christ our priest, to bear the iniquity of trespass, sacrilegiously rob Christ of his honour, and invade his rights. When we warn people not to trust to their own righteousness, nor dare to appear before God in it, but to rely on Christ's righteousness only for peace and pardon, it is because we dare not suffer them to bear the iniquity of trespass, for we know it is too heavy for them. II. Here is an explanation of the law, showing who were to be looked upon as belonging to the priest's family, and who not. 1. Sojourners and hired servants abode not in the house for ever; they were in the family, but not of it; and therefore they might not eat of the holy things (Lev 22:10): but the servant that was born in the house or bought with money, being a heirloom to the family, though a servant, yet might eat of the holy things, Lev 22:11. Note, Those only are entitled to the comforts of God's house who make it their rest for ever, and resolve to dwell in it all the days of their life. As for those who for a time only believe, to serve a present turn. They are looked upon but as sojourners and mercenaries, and have no part nor lot in the matter. 2. As to the children of the family, concerning the sons there could be no dispute, they were themselves priests, but concerning the daughters there was a distinction. While they continued in their father's house they might eat of the holy things; but, if they married such as were not priests, they lost their right (Lev 22:12), for now they were cut off from the family of the priests. Yet if a priest's daughter became a widow, and had no children in whom she might preserve a distinct family, and returned to her father's house again, being neither wife nor mother, she should again be looked upon as a daughter, and might eat of the holy things. If those whom Providence has made sorrowful widows, and who are dislodged from the rest they had in the house of a husband, yet find it again in a father's house, they have reason to be thankful to the widows' God, who does not leave them comfortless. 3. Here is a demand of restitution to be made by him that had no right to the holy things, and yet should eat of them unwittingly, Lev 22:14. If he did it presumptuously, and in contempt of the divine institution, he was liable to be cut off by the hand of God, and to be beaten by the magistrate; but, if he did it through weakness in inconsideration, he was to restore the value, adding a fifth part to it, besides which he was to bring an offering to atone for the trespass; see Lev 5:15, Lev 5:16. III. This law might be dispensed with in a case of necessity, as it was when David and his men ate of the show-bread, Sa1 21:6. And our Saviour justifies them, and gives a reason for it, which furnishes us with a lasting rule in all such cases, that God will have mercy and not sacrifice, Mat 12:3, Mat 12:4, Mat 12:7. Rituals must give way to morals. IV. It is an instruction to gospel ministers, who are stewards of the mysteries of God, not to admit all, without distinction, to eat of the holy things, but to take out the precious from the vile. Those that are scandalously ignorant or profane are strangers and aliens to the family of the Lord's priests; and it is not meet to take the children's bread and to cast it to such. Holy things are for holy persons, for those who are holy, at least, in profession, Mat 7:6.

Verse 17

Here are four laws concerning sacrifices: - I. Whatever was offered in sacrifice to God should be without blemish, otherwise it should not be accepted. This had often been mentioned in the particular institutions of the several sorts of offerings. Now here they are told what was to be accounted a blemish which rendered a beast unfit for sacrifice: if it was blind, or lame, had a wen, or the mange (Lev 22:22), - if it was bruised, or crushed, or broken, or cut (Lev 22:24), that is, as the Jewish writers understand it, if it was, in any of these ways, castrated, if bulls and rams were made into oxen and weathers, they might not be offered. Moreover a difference is made between what was brought as a free-will offering and what was brought as a vow, Lev 22:23. And, though none that had any of the forementioned blemishes might be brought for either, yet if a beast had any thing superfluous or lacking (that is, as the Jews understand it, if there was a disproportion or inequality between those parts that are pairs, when one eye, or ear, or leg, was bigger than it should be, or less than it should be) - if there was no other blemish than this, it might be accepted for a free-will offering, to which a man had not before laid himself, nor had the divine law laid him, under any particular obligation; but for a vow it might not be accepted. Thus God would teach us to make conscience of performing our promises to him very exactly, and not afterwards to abate in quantity or value of what we had solemnly engaged to devote to him. What was, before the vow, in our own power, as in the case of a free-will offering, afterwards is not, Act 5:4. It is again and again declared that no sacrifice should be accepted if it was thus blemished, Lev 22:20, Lev 22:21. According to this law great care was taken to search all the beasts that were brought to be sacrificed, that there might, to a certainty, be no blemish in them. A blemished sacrifice might not be accepted even from the hand of a stranger, though to such all possible encouragement should be given to do honour to the God of Israel, Lev 22:25. By this it appears that strangers were expected to come to the house of God from a far country (Kg1 8:41, Kg1 8:42), and that they should be welcome, and their offerings accepted, as those of Darius, Ezr 6:9, Ezr 6:10; Isa 56:6, Isa 56:7. The heathen priests were many of them not so strict in this matter, but would receive sacrifices for their gods that were ever so scandalous; but let strangers know that the God of Israel would not be so served. Now, 1. This law was then necessary for the preserving of the honour of the sanctuary, and of the God that was there worshipped. It was fit that every thing that was employed for his honour should be the best of the kind; for, as he is the greatest and brightest, so he is the best of beings; and he that is the best must have the best. See how greatly and justly displeasing the breach of this law was to the holy God, Mal 1:8, Mal 1:13, Mal 1:14. 2. This law made all the legal sacrifices the fitter to be types of Christ, the great sacrifice from which all these derived their virtue. In allusion to this law, he is said to be a Lamb without blemish and without spot, Pe1 1:19. As such a priest, so such a sacrifice, became us, who was harmless and undefiled. When Pilate declared, I find no fault in this man, he did thereby in effect pronounce the sacrifice without blemish. The Jews say it was the work of the sagan, or suffragan, high priest, to view the sacrifices, and see whether they were without blemish or no; when Christ suffered, Annas was in that office; but little did those who brought Christ to Annas first, by whom he was sent bound to Caiaphas, as a sacrifice fit to be offered (Joh 18:13, Joh 18:24), think that they were answering the type of this law. 3. It is an instruction to us to offer to God the best we have in our spiritual sacrifices. If our devotions are ignorant, and cold, and trifling, and full of distractions, we offer the blind, and the lame, and the sick, for sacrifice; but cursed be the deceiver that does so, for, while he thinks to put a cheat upon God, he puts a damning cheat upon his own soul. II. That no beast should be offered in sacrifice before it was eight days old, Lev 22:26, Lev 22:27. It was provided before that the firstlings of their cattle, which were to be dedicated to God, should not be brought to him till after the eighth day, Exo 22:30. Here it is provided that no creature should be offered in sacrifice till it was eight days old complete. Sooner than that it was not fit to be used at men's tables, and therefore not a God's altar. The Jews say, "It was because the sabbath sanctifies all things, and nothing should be offered to God till at least one sabbath had passed over it." It was in conformity to the law of circumcision, which children were to receive on the eighth day. Christ was sacrificed for us, not in his infancy, though then Herod sought to slay him, but in the prime of his time. III. That the dam and her young should not both be killed in one day, whether in sacrifice or for common use, Lev 22:28. There is such a law as this concerning birds, Deu 22:6. This was forbidden, not as evil in itself, but because it looked barbarous and cruel to the brute creatures; like the tyranny of the king of Babylon, that slew Zedekiah's sons before his eyes, and then put out his eyes. It looked ill-natured towards the species to kill two generations at once, as if one designed the ruin of the kind. IV. That the flesh of their thank-offerings should be eaten on the same day that they were sacrificed, Lev 22:29, Lev 22:30. This is a repetition of what we had before, Lev 7:15; Lev 19:6, Lev 19:7. The chapter concludes with such a general charge as we have often met with, to keep God's commandments, and not to profane his holy name, Lev 22:31, Lev 22:32. Those that profess God's name, if they do not make conscience of keeping his commandments, do but profane his name. The general reasons are added: God's authority over them - I am the Lord; his interest in them - I am your God; the title he had to them by redemption - "I brought you out of the land of Egypt, on purpose that I might be your God;" the designs of his grace concerning them - I am the Lord that hallow you; and the resolutions of his justice, if he had not honour from them, to get himself honour upon them - I will be hallowed among the children of Israel. God will be a loser in his glory by no man at last; but sooner or later will recover his right, either in the repentance of sinners or in their ruin.

Verse 2

22:2-6 The priest’s portions of the sacred offerings were regarded as “most holy” (see 2:3) and were not to come into contact with anything unclean (11:1–15:33). Accordingly, any descendant of Aaron who was unclean was forbidden to eat this food.

Verse 5

22:5 In Leviticus, the Hebrew word sherets always denotes an unclean small animal that swarms on land or in water (5:2; 11:10, 20-21, 23, 29, 31, 41-44).

Verse 9

22:9 will die for violating my instructions: As in 10:1-3. The temptation to offer improper offerings persisted throughout Israel’s history until after the Exile (Mal 1:6-9).

Verse 11

22:11 The only male outside the priest’s family who could eat the priest’s share was the priest’s slave. He would have no other food if this provision were denied him.

Verse 14

22:14-16 Similar to provisions for the guilt offering, a common person who accidentally ate the priestly portion had to repay 120 percent (see 5:14-16). However, the offering of a ram was not required in this case.

Verse 15

22:15 An Israelite who ate the “most holy” priestly portion as if it were common food would defile it.

Verse 18

22:18 Apparently individuals could present a whole burnt offering instead of a peace offering if they desired (see 1:3).

Verse 21

22:21 A peace offering could function in several ways: as a thanksgiving offering, an offering to fulfill a vow, or a voluntary offering (see 3:1-17).

Verse 23

22:23 The requirements for the voluntary offering were more lenient, allowing the use of a deformed animal. Fulfilling a vow, however, still required an animal that was not maimed or diseased. In no case would God accept a sacrifice that could not be eaten by a person or that was not a whole animal.

Verse 27

22:27 Leaving a newborn animal with its mother for seven days allowed time to determine the animal’s health (see Exod 22:30).

Verse 28

22:28 on the same day: There are several possible explanations for this command, although none is certain: (1) Senseless slaughtering would leave nothing of the herd; (2) it would be inhumane to slaughter the young and the mother at the same time; or (3) it would be too similar to pagan worship rites, where the newborn animal was cooked in the milk of its slain mother (see Exod 23:19).

Knowing His Perfect Will - Part 2

The Standing Ordinances of Religion

Thanksgiving

Our Daily Homily - Leviticus

Epistle 285

Introduction

Verse 2

Verse 4

Verse 10

Verse 13

Verse 14

Verse 20

Verse 23

Verse 24

Verse 25

Verse 27

Verse 28

Verse 30

Verse 32

Verse 33

Introduction

Verse 3

Verse 4

Verse 8

Verse 10

Verse 13

Verse 14

Verse 15

Verse 19

Verse 23

Verse 27

Introduction

Verse 1

Verse 2

Verse 3

Verse 4

Verse 5

Verse 6

Verse 7

Verse 8

Verse 9

Verse 10

Verse 11

Verse 12

Verse 13

Verse 14

Verse 15

Verse 16

Verse 17

Verse 18

Verse 19

Verse 20

Verse 21

Verse 22

Verse 23

Verse 24

Verse 25

Verse 26

Verse 27

Verse 28

Verse 29

Verse 30

Verse 31

Verse 32

Verse 1

Verse 17

Verse 21

Verse 23

Verse 24

Verse 25

Verse 27

Verse 28

Verse 31

Introduction

Verse 1

Verse 10

Verse 17

Verse 2

Verse 5

Verse 9