Leviticus · Chapter 7

Verse 1. Trespass-offering] See end of the chapter. See Clarke note at “Leviticus 7:38”.

Verses 1, 2. Here the priests are directed in their office about the trespass-offerings, as the people had been before. The blood shall he sprinkle round about — This is a different rule from that observed in the sin-offering, the blood of which was to be put upon the horns of the altar, Leviticus 4:25; but this was to be sprinkled round about it, as was ordered respecting the whole burnt-offerings.

ADDITIONAL LAWS OF THE TRESPASS OFFERING, 1-10.

1. Trespass offering — See chap. 5, introductory remarks, and verse 6, note. The primary idea involved in the asham, or guilt offering, is that aspect of sin which constitutes it a debt payable unto God, and frequently to man also, to whom recompense must be made when the asham was offered.

Verse 2. In the place where they kill the burnt-offering] viz., on the north side of the altar, Leviticus 1:11.

Verses 1, 2. Here the priests are directed in their office about the trespass-offerings, as the people had been before. The blood shall he sprinkle round about — This is a different rule from that observed in the sin-offering, the blood of which was to be put upon the horns of the altar, Leviticus 4:25; but this was to be sprinkled round about it, as was ordered respecting the whole burnt-offerings.

2. The blood… shall he sprinkle — See Leviticus 1:5, note. “The sprinkling of the blood,” says Outram, “was by much the most sacred part of the entire service, since it was that by which the life and soul of the victim were considered to be given to God as the supreme Lord of life and death.” In explaining the significance of this rite, orthodox writers assert that the blood, as representing the life of an innocent animal, was offered to Divine justice as the substitute for the death-penalty inflicted on the guilty soul of the offerer. On the other hand, Socinian and rationalistic writers deny the possibility of rendering a satisfaction to the justice of God. Bahr, with much depth of thought and apparent conformity to the fundamental truths of the Scriptures, insists that there is no symbolical execution of punishment, but rather a typical giving away of the soul of the offerer unto God. “As the presentation of the blood of the beast is a giving up and away of the beast-life in death, so must the natural, that is, selfish life of the offerer, acting in contrariety to God, be given up and away, that is, die; but since this is a giving away to Jehovah, it is no mere ceasing to be, but a dying which, eo ipso, goes into life. Accordingly, the meaning of a sacrifice is in short this, that the natural, sinful being (life) is given up to God in death, in order to obtain the true being (sanctification) through fellowship with God.” This view proceeds upon the supposition that sin is a mere trifle, a bitter-sweet good, a necessary misstep of the infant tottering from his probationary cradle to the state of fixed holiness, and needing no atonement in a universe in which all finite personalities are only manifestations of the one impersonal and nondescript agency called God, and the radical distinction between sin and holiness is an illusion. This exegesis of the bloodshedding on Jewish altars and on Mount Calvary is admirably adapted “to a mystical, pantheistic nature-religion,” but it is extremely repugnant to the plain theistical religion typically set forth by Moses, and actually established by the Son of God.

Verse 3. The rump] See Clarke note on “Leviticus 3:9”, where the principal subjects in this chapter are explained, being nearly the same in both.

3. The fat — See Leviticus 3:3, 17, notes. The rump — The fat tail. See Leviticus 3:9, note.

Verse 4. The fat that is on them] Chiefly the fat that was found in a detached state, not mixed with the muscles; such as the omentum or caul, the fat of the mesentery, the fat about the kidneys, &c. See Clarke note on “Leviticus 3:9”, &c.

4. The kidneys — Sometimes rendered reins. See Leviticus 3:4, note. The caul — See Leviticus 3:4, note.

ADDITIONAL LAWS OF THE TRESPASS OFFERING, 1-10.

1. Trespass offering — See chap. 5, introductory remarks, and verse 6, note. The primary idea involved in the asham, or guilt offering, is that aspect of sin which constitutes it a debt payable unto God, and frequently to man also, to whom recompense must be made when the asham was offered.

ADDITIONAL LAWS OF THE TRESPASS OFFERING, 1-10.

1. Trespass offering — See chap. 5, introductory remarks, and verse 6, note. The primary idea involved in the asham, or guilt offering, is that aspect of sin which constitutes it a debt payable unto God, and frequently to man also, to whom recompense must be made when the asham was offered.

V. 7. So is-In the matter following, for in other things they differed. The priests shall have it-That part of it, which was by God allowed to the priest.

Verses 7, 8. As is the sin-offering, so is the trespass-offering — In the matter following, for in other things they differed. The priests shall have it — That part of it which was by God allowed to the priest. The priest shall have to himself the skin — The note of Bishop Patrick is worth transcribing here: “All the flesh of the burnt-offerings being wholly consumed, as well as the fat upon the altar, there was nothing that could fall to the share of the priest but the skin, which is here given him for his pains. It was observed upon Genesis 3:21, that it is probable Adam himself offered the first sacrifice, and had the skin given him by God, to make the garments for him and his wife. In conformity to which the priests ever after had the skin of the whole burnt-offerings for their portion; which was a custom among the Gentiles, (as well as the Jews,) who gave the skins of their sacrifices to their priests, when they were not burned with the sacrifices, as in some sin-offerings they were among the Jews, see Leviticus 4:11; and they employed them to a superstitious use, by lying upon them in their temples, in hopes to have future things revealed to them in their dreams. Of this we have a proof in Virgil’s seventh Æneid, line 86. See Dryden’s translation, verse 127.”

7. As the sin offering is, so is the trespass offering — Though much alike in their interior essence and symbolical meaning, they had this difference, the trespass offering was always personal, while the sin offering might be congregational. See Leviticus 5:6, note.

Verse 8. The priest shall have to himself the skin] Bishop Patrick supposes that this right of the priest to the skin commenced with the offering of Adam, “for it is probable,” says he, “that Adam himself offered the first sacrifice, and had the skin given him by God to make garments for him and his wife; in conformity to which the priests ever after had the skin of the whole burnt-offerings for their portion, which was a custom among the Gentiles as well as the Jews, who gave the skins of their sacrifices to their priests, when they were not burnt with the sacrifices, as in some sin-offerings they were among the Jews, see Leviticus 4:11. And they employed them to a superstitious use, by lying upon them in their temples, in hopes to have future things revealed to them in their dreams. Of this we have a proof in Virgil, Æn. lib. vii., ver. 86-95. “——————huc dona sacerdos

Cum tulit, et cæsarum ovium sub nocte silenti

Pellibus incubuit stratis, somnosque petivit;

Multa modus simulncra videt volitantia miris,

Et varias audit voces, fruiturque deorum

Colloquio, atque imis Acheronta affatur Avernis.

Hic et tum pater ipse petens responsa Latinus

Centum lanigeras mactabat rite bidentes,

Atque harum effultus tergo stratisque jacebat

Velleribus. Subita ex alto vox reddita luco est.”

First, on the fleeces of the slaughter’d sheep

By night the sacred priest dissolves in sleep,

When in a train, before his slumbering eye,

Thin airy forms and wondrous visions fly.

He calls the powers who guard the infernal floods, And talks, inspired, familiar with the gods.

To this dread oracle the prince withdrew,

And first a hundred sheep the monarch slew;

Then on their fleeces lay; and from the wood

He heard, distinct, these accents of the god.

-PITT.

The same superstition, practised precisely in the same way and for the same purposes, prevail to the present day in the Highlands of Scotland, as the reader may see from the following note of Sir Walter Scott, in his Lady of the Lake:—

“The Highlanders of Scotland, like all rude people, had various superstitious modes of inquiring into futurity. One of the most noted was the togharm. A person was wrapped up in the skin of a newly-slain bullock, and deposited beside a water-fall, or at the bottom of a precipice, or in some other strange, wild, and unusual situation, where the scenery around him suggested nothing but objects of horror. In this situation he revolved in his mind the question proposed; and whatever was impressed upon him by his exalted imagination, passed for the inspiration of the disembodied spirits who haunt these desolate recesses. One way of consulting this oracle was by a party of men, who first retired to solitary places, remote from any house, and there they singled out one of their number, and wrapt him in a big cow’s hide, which they folded about him; his whole body was covered with it except his head, and so left in this posture all night, until his invisible friends relieved him by giving a proper answer to the question in hand; which he received, as he fancied, from several persons that he found about him all that time. His consorts returned to him at day-break; and then he communicated his news to them, which often proved fatal to those concerned in such unwarrantable inquiries. “Mr. Alexander Cooper, present minister of North Virt, told me that one John Erach, in the Isle of Lewis, assured him it was his fate to have been led by his curiosity with some who consulted this oracle, and that he was a night within the hide above mentioned, during which time he felt and heard such terrible things that he could not express them: the impression made on him was such as could never go off; and he said, for a thousand worlds he would never again be concerned in the like performance, for it had disordered him to a high degree. He confessed it ingenuously, and with an air of great remorse, and seemed to be very penitent under a just sense of so great a crime: he declared this about five years since, and is still living in the Isle of Lewis for any thing I know.”-Description of the Western Isles, p. 110. See also Pennant’s Scottish Tour, vol. ii., p. 301; and Sir W. Scott’s Lady of the Lake.

Verses 7, 8. As is the sin-offering, so is the trespass-offering — In the matter following, for in other things they differed. The priests shall have it — That part of it which was by God allowed to the priest. The priest shall have to himself the skin — The note of Bishop Patrick is worth transcribing here: “All the flesh of the burnt-offerings being wholly consumed, as well as the fat upon the altar, there was nothing that could fall to the share of the priest but the skin, which is here given him for his pains. It was observed upon Genesis 3:21, that it is probable Adam himself offered the first sacrifice, and had the skin given him by God, to make the garments for him and his wife. In conformity to which the priests ever after had the skin of the whole burnt-offerings for their portion; which was a custom among the Gentiles, (as well as the Jews,) who gave the skins of their sacrifices to their priests, when they were not burned with the sacrifices, as in some sin-offerings they were among the Jews, see Leviticus 4:11; and they employed them to a superstitious use, by lying upon them in their temples, in hopes to have future things revealed to them in their dreams. Of this we have a proof in Virgil’s seventh Æneid, line 86. See Dryden’s translation, verse 127.”

8. The skin of the burnt offering — This was a perquisite of the priest, to be kept or sold at his pleasure. Bishop Patrick suggests that Adam was the first priest who offered a burnt offering, and that the presentation of the skin to him by the Creator established the precedent here ratified by the ceremonial law. The same custom is found among pagans, whose priests superstitiously thought that by lying upon these skins they would be endowed with the gift of prescience. See Virgil’s AEneid, book vii, verses 86-95. The same superstition lingers to this day in the Highlands of Scotland.

V. 9. All the meal-offering-Except the part reserved by God, Leviticus 2:2,9. Because these were ready drest and hot, and to be presently eaten; shall be the priests-The priest, who offered it, was in reason to expect, something more than his brethren who laboured not about it; and that he had only in this offering; for the others were equally distributed.

Verse 9. Baken in the oven] See Clarke note on “Leviticus 2:5”, &c.

Verse 9. All the meat or meal-offering shall be the priest’s — Except the part reserved by God, (Leviticus 2:2, 9,) these being ready dressed, and hot, and to be eaten presently. And the priest who offered it was, in reason, to expect something more than his brethren who laboured not about it, and that he had only in this offering; for the others were equally distributed. For (verse 10) every meat or meal-offering, which was of raw flour, whether mingled with oil or dry, that is, without oil, or drink-offering, all the sons of Aaron were to share equally among them. And there was manifest reason for this difference, because these were offered in greater quantities than the former; and, being raw, might more easily be reserved for the several priests, to dress them in the way which each of them might prefer.

9. The meat offering — The bread offering, variously prepared, is described in chap. 2, notes. Shall be the priest’s that offereth it — Thus individual diligence was stimulated and rewarded; but to provide the sick and aged priests with materials for their own sustenance and for offerings to God, the commandment is given in verse 10 that all the sons of Aaron should have the oil and unbaked flour, the largest part, one as much as another — Thus there was a blending of individual interests with community-life as a safeguard against indolence. Moreover, if the whole had been given to the officiating priest there would have been more than he could consume. The cooked-bread offering is supposed to have been small in amount.

V. 10. Dry-Without oil, or drink-offering, as those Leviticus 5:11, Numbers 5:15. All the sons of Aaron-These were to be equally divided among all the priests. And there was manifest reason for this difference, because these were in greater quantity than the former; and being raw, might more easily be reserved for the several priests to dress it in that way which each of them liked.

Verse 10. Every meat-offering, whether mingled with oil or dry, that is, not mingled, as the Vulgate very properly renders it. In later times these offerings were prepared at the foot of Mount Olivet. The priests and privileged persons ate in the temple, while suitable conveniences were made for all the worshippers, and for the gentiles to eat apart.

ADDITIONAL LAWS OF THE TRESPASS OFFERING, 1-10.

1. Trespass offering — See chap. 5, introductory remarks, and verse 6, note. The primary idea involved in the asham, or guilt offering, is that aspect of sin which constitutes it a debt payable unto God, and frequently to man also, to whom recompense must be made when the asham was offered.

Verse 11. This is the law of the sacrifice of peace-offerings — These are the only sort of offerings to be spoken of. There were several sorts of them, which required various rites. The first was a gratulatory offering, or a sacrifice of thanksgiving, so called because it was offered to God for some particular benefit received, verse 12. Such sacrifices were accompanied with feasting, and sometimes with high demonstrations of joy, 1 Samuel 11:15; 1 Kings 8:6. Of these the psalmist speaks, when he says, Let them sacrifice the sacrifices of thanksgiving, and declare his works with rejoicing, Psalm 107:22. The second was a votive-offering, or vow, being also a sacrifice of thanksgiving, but offered in consequence of a vow, or religious oath, whereby the party obliged himself to offer to God such a sacrifice, in case of receiving some particular benefit. The third was a voluntary offering, being a sacrifice freely made beforehand, in the nature of a prayer for obtaining some future blessing, verse 16; or, as Le Clerc explains it, a voluntary offering was a sacrifice offered, not for any particular benefit either received or expected, but merely from the overflowing of a heart grateful to God for his goodness in general. We find this oblation plainly distinguished from a votive-offering, Leviticus 22:23.

LAWS OF THE PEACE OFFERING, 11-21.

11. The law of… the peace offerings — See chap. 3, notes. There are added to the description given there the chief elements of the bread offering, namely, unleavened cakes and oil. Both offerings are eucharistic, affording an expression of gratitude to Jehovah for the peace which he gives to the obedient, and of fellowship with all the children of Israel. Here the peace offering appears under three divisions, the todha, or thanksgiving; the nedher, or vow, and the n’dhabha; the freewill. The last was quite inferior, since a defective victim might be sacrificed. Leviticus 22:23. The three are thus distinguished — the first is an outgushing of praise for spontaneous tokens of Jehovah’s goodness; the second is an obligatory requital for some act of Divine beneficence done in consideration of a vow; and the third has regard to no special benefaction, but affords a method of taking the initiative in seeking God.

Verse 12. If he offer it for a thanksgiving] See the notes at the end of this chapter. See Clarke note at “Leviticus 7:38”.

Verse 12. If he offer it for a thanksgiving — Hebrew, hdwt l[, gnal todah, for confession, it being accompanied with a public confession or acknowledgment of the mercies and deliverances which the offerer had received from God. And to this the apostle alludes, (Hebrews 13:15,) exhorting Christians to offer to God continually, through Christ, the sacrifice of praise; that is, says he, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks, omologountwn, confessing to his name.

Ver. 12. Thanksgiving. Jacob, after he had seen the ladder at Bethel, made a vow to devote the tenth of his increase to the Lord, if he would bless him, and bring him back again in peace. And being himself both the priest and the prince, how could his oblations of peace and thanksgiving be disposed of, but by one part being burnt, and the rest eaten in a holy feast to the Lord? So Israel followed the example of their fathers.

LAWS OF THE PEACE OFFERING, 11-21.

11. The law of… the peace offerings — See chap. 3, notes. There are added to the description given there the chief elements of the bread offering, namely, unleavened cakes and oil. Both offerings are eucharistic, affording an expression of gratitude to Jehovah for the peace which he gives to the obedient, and of fellowship with all the children of Israel. Here the peace offering appears under three divisions, the todha, or thanksgiving; the nedher, or vow, and the n’dhabha; the freewill. The last was quite inferior, since a defective victim might be sacrificed. Leviticus 22:23. The three are thus distinguished — the first is an outgushing of praise for spontaneous tokens of Jehovah’s goodness; the second is an obligatory requital for some act of Divine beneficence done in consideration of a vow; and the third has regard to no special benefaction, but affords a method of taking the initiative in seeking God.

V. 13. Leavened bread-Because this was a sacrifice of another kind than those in which leaven was forbidden, this being a sacrifice of thanksgiving for God’s blessings, among which leavened bread was one. Leaven indeed was universally forbidden, Leviticus 2:11. But that prohibition concerned only things offered and burnt upon the altar, which this bread was not.

Verse 13. Leavened bread — Because this was a sacrifice of another kind than those in which leaven was forbidden, this being a sacrifice of thanksgiving for God’s blessings, among which leavened bread was one. Leaven indeed was universally forbidden, Leviticus 2:11; but that prohibition concerned only things offered and burned upon the altar, which this bread was not.

13. He shall offer… leavened bread — This requirement does not conflict with the prohibition of leaven in Leviticus 2:11, because it is not burned, but eaten in a joyful banquet where it is proper to gratify the palate.

V. 14. Of it-That is, of the offering, one of each part of the whole: it being most agreeable to the rules laid down before and afterward, that the priest should have a share in the unleavened cakes and wafers, as well as in the leavened bread.

14. Heave offering — According to rabbinical tradition, the manner of heaving was to lay the oblation on the hands of the offerer, the priest putting his hands underneath and then moving them upwards and downwards. The import of heaving in sacrifices is supposed to be a presentation to God, who rules in heaven above and in the earth beneath. It was given to the priest as his representative.

Verse 15. He shall not leave any of it until the morning.] Because in such a hot country it was apt to putrefy, and as it was considered to be holy, it would have been very improper to expose that to putrefaction which had been consecrated to the Divine Being. Mr. Harmer supposes that the law here refers rather to the custom of drying flesh which had been devoted to religious purposes, which is practised among the Mohammedans to the present time. This, he thinks, might have given rise to the prohibition, as the sacred flesh thus preserved might have been abused to superstitious purposes. Therefore God says, Leviticus 7:18, “If any of the flesh of the sacrifice-be eaten at all on the third day, it shall not be accepted, neither shall it be imputed unto him that offereth it; it is an abomination, and the soul that eateth of it shall bear his iniquity.” That is, on Mr. Harmer’s hypothesis, This sacred flesh shall avail nothing to him that eats it after the first or second day on which it is offered; however consecrated before, it shall not be considered sacred after that time. See Harmer’s Obs., vol. i., p. 394, edit. 1808.

Verse 15. The flesh shall be eaten the same day — This was partly that none of it might be exposed to corruption, (for by the third day it might easily, in those hot countries, putrefy,) and partly that the offerer might not be sordidly saving of this sacred banquet, but be taught to show his piety to God by his love to his fellow-creatures, forthwith inviting his friends to partake of it with him; and in case he and they could not eat it up, by distributing the remains among the poor. This law might also be intended to prevent their spending many days in feasting under the pretence of religion. It may be observed further here, that the longest time allowed for eating the flesh of any of the sacrifices enjoined by Moses, was the day after that on which they were killed; the eating of it on the third day is declared to be an abomination.

15. The flesh… shall be eaten the same day — The right shoulder, or heave offering, and the wave breast were to be eaten by the priests and their families in the camp, or in Jerusalem, and the remainder of this sacrifice was returned to the offerer, to be eaten by himself and his friends, denoting that they were admitted to a state of intimate companionship with God, sharing part and part with him and his priests, having a standing in his house and a seat at his table. It was an occasion of peculiar joy and gladness, strikingly prefiguring the Lord’s Supper, rightly called the Holy Eucharist, or Thanksgiving, and the blessedness of eating and drinking in the kingdom of God. Luke 14:15. He shall not leave any… until the morning — It would be very improper to expose to putrefaction any thing considered holy. This is supposed to be the ground of the prohibition. Harmer thinks that it is aimed at the Arabian practice of drying the meats presented in sacrifice, which is contrary to both the genius of the Mosaic and of the Christian dispensations. The Gospel does not impart to the believer grace to be put aside for a time of future need, as a soldier puts several days’ rations in his haversack when he is to be separated from his base of supplies, nor does it require him to live on old experiences, since only unbelief can cut him off from access to the bread of life. He is therefore taught to pray, “Give us this day our daily bread.”

V. 16. A vow-Offered in performance of a vow, the man having desired some special favour from God, and vowed the sacrifice to God if he would grant it. On the morrow also-Which was not allowed for the thank-offering.

Verse 16. If the sacrifice be a vow — Offered in performance of a vow, the offerer having desired some special favour from God, and vowed the sacrifice to God if he would grant it. A voluntary offering, which a person offered freely to God, in testimony of his faith and love, not being under the obligation of any particular vow of his own, or command from God. On the morrow also the remainder shall be eaten — Which was not allowed in the case of the thank-offering. The reason of which is to be fetched only from God’s good pleasure and will, to which he expects our obedience, though we discern not the reason of his appointments.

16. A vow, or a voluntary offering — See verse 11, note. Since these were inferior offerings, they were considered less sacred. Hence two days were allowed for eating them. There was little difficulty in this matter where friends were numerous and near. The requirement to eat within one or two days would often induce the offerer to invite the poor to this religious banquet. Theodoret, Clericus, and others, assert that the limit of two days was designed to compel the worshipper to invite the poor to his religious banquet. It is more probable that it is a safeguard against the desecration of holy things.

Verses 17, 18. The flesh on the third day shall be burned with fire — Lest it should putrefy, and so be exposed to contempt, and to prevent their distrust of God’s providence, or indulging a covetous disposition, by reserving for domestic use what ought to be given to their friends or the poor. If eaten at all on the third day, it shall not be accepted — In this case, not only the sacrifice became worthless, but the offerer guilty of a new offence. Neither shall it be imputed unto him — For an acceptable service to God, but reckoned as if it had not been offered at all. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin; and that cannot be of faith which has not the sanction of God’s authority, expressed or implied, and is not done agreeably to his will. It is therefore not acceptable to him.

LAWS OF THE PEACE OFFERING, 11-21.

11. The law of… the peace offerings — See chap. 3, notes. There are added to the description given there the chief elements of the bread offering, namely, unleavened cakes and oil. Both offerings are eucharistic, affording an expression of gratitude to Jehovah for the peace which he gives to the obedient, and of fellowship with all the children of Israel. Here the peace offering appears under three divisions, the todha, or thanksgiving; the nedher, or vow, and the n’dhabha; the freewill. The last was quite inferior, since a defective victim might be sacrificed. Leviticus 22:23. The three are thus distinguished — the first is an outgushing of praise for spontaneous tokens of Jehovah’s goodness; the second is an obligatory requital for some act of Divine beneficence done in consideration of a vow; and the third has regard to no special benefaction, but affords a method of taking the initiative in seeking God.

V. 18. Neither shall it be imputed-For an acceptable service to God.

Verses 17, 18. The flesh on the third day shall be burned with fire — Lest it should putrefy, and so be exposed to contempt, and to prevent their distrust of God’s providence, or indulging a covetous disposition, by reserving for domestic use what ought to be given to their friends or the poor. If eaten at all on the third day, it shall not be accepted — In this case, not only the sacrifice became worthless, but the offerer guilty of a new offence. Neither shall it be imputed unto him — For an acceptable service to God, but reckoned as if it had not been offered at all. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin; and that cannot be of faith which has not the sanction of God’s authority, expressed or implied, and is not done agreeably to his will. It is therefore not acceptable to him.

18. Neither shall it be imputed unto him — It shall not be reckoned or accounted as a worthy act, as was Abraham’s faith. Genesis 15:6. Obedience is more acceptable than sacrifice, without which an offering becomes an abomination. Isaiah 1:11-15.

V. 19. And the flesh-Namely of the holy offering, of which he is here treating; and therefore the general word is to be so limited; for other flesh one might eat in this case. That toucheth-After its oblation; which might easily happen, as it was conveyed from the altar to the place where it was eaten: for it was not eaten in the holy place, as appears, because it was eaten by the priests, together with the offerers, who might not come thither. The flesh-That is, the other flesh; that which shall not be polluted by any unclean touch. All that are clean-Whether priests or offerers, or guests invited to the feast.

Verses 19-21. All that be clean shall eat thereof — Whether priests, or offerers, or guests invited. Both the flesh and the eaters of it must be clean. The soul that eateth — Knowingly; for if it were done ignorantly, a sacrifice was accepted for it. Having his uncleanness upon him — Not being cleansed according to the appointment, Leviticus 11:24, &c. Shall be cut off from his people — That is, excluded from all the privileges of an Israelite. The intention of all these precepts was to preserve the greater reverence and regard for things sacred, and to signify, that all who live in sin not repented of and mortified, are rejected when they draw nigh to God in outward acts of worship.

LAWS OF THE PEACE OFFERING, 11-21.

11. The law of… the peace offerings — See chap. 3, notes. There are added to the description given there the chief elements of the bread offering, namely, unleavened cakes and oil. Both offerings are eucharistic, affording an expression of gratitude to Jehovah for the peace which he gives to the obedient, and of fellowship with all the children of Israel. Here the peace offering appears under three divisions, the todha, or thanksgiving; the nedher, or vow, and the n’dhabha; the freewill. The last was quite inferior, since a defective victim might be sacrificed. Leviticus 22:23. The three are thus distinguished — the first is an outgushing of praise for spontaneous tokens of Jehovah’s goodness; the second is an obligatory requital for some act of Divine beneficence done in consideration of a vow; and the third has regard to no special benefaction, but affords a method of taking the initiative in seeking God.

V. 20. That eateth-Knowingly; for if it were done ignorantly, a sacrifice was accepted for it. Not being cleansed from his uncleanness according to the appointment, Leviticus 11:24, &c. This verse speaks of uncleanness from an internal cause, as by an issue, &c. for what was from an external cause is spoken of in the next verse.

Verse 20. Having his uncleanness upon him] Having touched any unclean thing by which he became legally defiled, and had not washed his clothes, and bathed his flesh.

Verses 19-21. All that be clean shall eat thereof — Whether priests, or offerers, or guests invited. Both the flesh and the eaters of it must be clean. The soul that eateth — Knowingly; for if it were done ignorantly, a sacrifice was accepted for it. Having his uncleanness upon him — Not being cleansed according to the appointment, Leviticus 11:24, &c. Shall be cut off from his people — That is, excluded from all the privileges of an Israelite. The intention of all these precepts was to preserve the greater reverence and regard for things sacred, and to signify, that all who live in sin not repented of and mortified, are rejected when they draw nigh to God in outward acts of worship.

20. The soul… having his uncleanness — This verse implies that there is an order in the religious exercises of the Hebrews. The ceremonially impure could bring but one acceptable oblation, the sin offering, for the removal of his defilement. Eucharistic offerings from hands impure are not a sweet savour unto Jehovah, but a stench in his nostrils. The first duty of an impenitent sinner is not to lay earthly holocausts upon God’s altar, but to “cease to do evil.” That soul shall be cut off from his people — This must be understood as the punishment of an audacious and defiant trampling down of Jehovah’s authority, a high-handed sin, and not a mere inadvertence. The cutting off denotes not mere excommunication, but, “the punishment of death in general, without defining the manner.” — Gesenius. Probation is made up of small things. These are tests of character more practicable than requirements of greater seeming importance. Divine authority infuses a moral element into mere ritualism. Hence positive precepts, as the Christian sacraments, are often a higher test of faith than commandments, which find their reason in man’s moral nature. See Butler’s Analogy, part ii, chap. 1.

THE FAT AND BLOOD FORBIDDEN TO BE EATEN, 22-30.

V. 21. Of man-Or, of women, for the word signifies both.

Verse 21. The uncleanness of man] Any ulcer, sore, or leprosy; or any sort of cutaneous disorder, either loathsome or infectious.

Verses 19-21. All that be clean shall eat thereof — Whether priests, or offerers, or guests invited. Both the flesh and the eaters of it must be clean. The soul that eateth — Knowingly; for if it were done ignorantly, a sacrifice was accepted for it. Having his uncleanness upon him — Not being cleansed according to the appointment, Leviticus 11:24, &c. Shall be cut off from his people — That is, excluded from all the privileges of an Israelite. The intention of all these precepts was to preserve the greater reverence and regard for things sacred, and to signify, that all who live in sin not repented of and mortified, are rejected when they draw nigh to God in outward acts of worship.

Ver. 21. Any unclean thing. The next words illustrate the meaning to be, not the touching of a beast, as a horse or an ass, for this they did daily; but the uncleanness of man or of beast, contracted by assisting animals in the act of casting forth their young. All Shem’s race, and all the primitive families of the earth, were careful to preserve themselves ceremonially holy to the Lord, which tended at the same time to inculcate moral purity. This indeed is the substance and the end of all the divine precepts. “Be ye holy, for the Lord your God is holy.” Leviticus 20:7.

LAWS OF THE PEACE OFFERING, 11-21.

11. The law of… the peace offerings — See chap. 3, notes. There are added to the description given there the chief elements of the bread offering, namely, unleavened cakes and oil. Both offerings are eucharistic, affording an expression of gratitude to Jehovah for the peace which he gives to the obedient, and of fellowship with all the children of Israel. Here the peace offering appears under three divisions, the todha, or thanksgiving; the nedher, or vow, and the n’dhabha; the freewill. The last was quite inferior, since a defective victim might be sacrificed. Leviticus 22:23. The three are thus distinguished — the first is an outgushing of praise for spontaneous tokens of Jehovah’s goodness; the second is an obligatory requital for some act of Divine beneficence done in consideration of a vow; and the third has regard to no special benefaction, but affords a method of taking the initiative in seeking God.

V. 23. The general prohibition of eating fat, Leviticus 3:17, is here explained of those kind of creatures which were sacrificed. The fat of others they might eat.

Verse 23. Fat, of ox, or of sheep, or of goat.] Any other fat they might eat, but the fat of these was sacred, because they were the only animals which were offered in sacrifice, though many others ranked among the clean animals as well as these. But it is likely that this prohibition is to be understood of these animals when offered in sacrifice, and then only in reference to the inward fat, as mentioned on Leviticus 7:4. Of the fat in any other circumstances it cannot be intended, as it was one of the especial blessings which God gave to the people. Butter of kine, and milk of sheep, with FAT of LAMBS, and RAMS of the breed of Bashan, and GOATS, were the provision that he gave to his followers. See Deuteronomy 32:12-14.

Verses 23, 24. The general prohibition of eating fat, (Leviticus 3:17,) is here explained of those kinds of creatures which were sacrificed. The fat of others they might eat. And (verse 24) he shows that this prohibition reached not only to the fat of those beasts which were offered to God, but also of those that died, or were killed at home.

23. Eat no manner of fat — This prohibits only the interior fat or suet of the sacrificial animals, whether offered in sacrifice or slain for food. See Leviticus 3:3, 17, notes. Some writers assert that only the internal fat of animals offered to God is forbidden, since “the fat (suet) of lambs, rams, and goats,” was one of the provisions graciously bestowed on the Israelites. Deuteronomy 32:13, 14. But this question is answered in the next verse.

V. 24. He speaks still of the same kinds of beasts, and shews that this prohibition reaches not only to the fat of those beasts which were offered to God, but also of those that died, or were killed at home. And if this seems a superfluous prohibition, since the lean as well as the fat of such beasts were forbidden, Leviticus 22:8, it must be noted, that prohibition reached only to the priests, Leviticus 7:4.

Verses 23, 24. The general prohibition of eating fat, (Leviticus 3:17,) is here explained of those kinds of creatures which were sacrificed. The fat of others they might eat. And (verse 24) he shows that this prohibition reached not only to the fat of those beasts which were offered to God, but also of those that died, or were killed at home.

25. Of the beast, of which men offer — This is evidently an interdict of the fat of the entire class of sacrificial animals, and not of the particular victims. Fat promotes cutaneous diseases. The prohibition of this article of diet also raised up a barrier between the Israelites and the idolatrous nations by restraining the former from partaking of the festive banquets of the latter. Michaelis suggests that the prohibition of fat was for the purpose of promoting the culture of the olive, and Knobel maintains that it was because the mouth of man is unclean. A better reason is, because it would be an infringement of Jehovah’s rights to eat as common food that which he had sanctified unto himself.

26. Ye shall eat no… blood — To this prohibition there is no exception. It has especial respect to the atoning blood of sacrifice, first of the type and then of the great Antitype.

Verse 27. Whatsoever soul-that eateth any manner of blood] See Clarke’s note on “Genesis 9:4”. Shall be cut off-excommunicated from the people of God, and so deprived of any part in their inheritance, and in their blessings. See Clarke’s note on “Genesis 17:14”.

V. 29. Shall bring-Not by another, but by himself, that is, those parts of the peace-offering, which are in a special manner offered to God. His oblation unto the Lord-That is, to the tabernacle, where the Lord was present in a special manner. Though part of such offerings might be eaten in any clean place, Leviticus 10:14, yet not till they had been killed, and part of them offered to the Lord in the place appointed by him for that purpose.

Verse 29. Shall bring his oblation] Meaning those things which were given out of the peace-offerings to the Lord and to the priest.-Ainsworth.

Verses 29, 30. Shall bring — Not by another, but by himself, that is, those parts of the peace-offering which are in a special manner offered to God. His oblation unto the Lord — That is, to the tabernacle, where the Lord was present in a special manner His own hands — After the beast was killed, and the parts of it divided, the priest was to put the parts mentioned into the hands of the offerer. Offerings made by fire — So called, not strictly, as burnt-offerings are, because some parts of these were left for the priests, but more largely, because even these peace-offerings were in part, though not wholly, burned. Waved — To and fro, by his hands, which were supported and directed by the hands of the priest.

V. 30. His own hands-After the beast was killed, and the parts of it divided, the priest was to put the parts mentioned into the hands of the offerer. Offerings made by fire-So called, not strictly, as burnt-offerings are, because some parts of these were left for the priest, but more largely, because even these peace-offerings were in part, tho’ not wholly, burnt. Waved-To and fro, by his hands, which were supported and directed by the hands of the priest.

Verse 30. Wave-offering] See Clarke on “Exodus 29:27”.

Verses 29, 30. Shall bring — Not by another, but by himself, that is, those parts of the peace-offering which are in a special manner offered to God. His oblation unto the Lord — That is, to the tabernacle, where the Lord was present in a special manner His own hands — After the beast was killed, and the parts of it divided, the priest was to put the parts mentioned into the hands of the offerer. Offerings made by fire — So called, not strictly, as burnt-offerings are, because some parts of these were left for the priests, but more largely, because even these peace-offerings were in part, though not wholly, burned. Waved — To and fro, by his hands, which were supported and directed by the hands of the priest.

30. A wave offering — The rabbies say that the offering was laid upon the hands of the offerer. The priest, putting his hands beneath, moves the offering to and fro horizontally. But it is not certain from Exodus 29:26, 27 whether the waving was done by the offerer alone or by the help of the priest. The significance of this peculiar motion is doubtful. The rabbies say that it symbolically teaches that Jehovah is present in every quarter of the earth. The breast thus waved was eaten by the priest and his family.

PORTION OF THE PRIESTS, 11-34.

V. 31. His sons-The portion of every succeeding high-priest and his family.

Verse 32. The right shoulder] See Clarke on “Exodus 29:27”.

Ver. 32. A heave-offering. The right shoulder was elevated high, as an offering to the Lord: just as the right breast was waved round with the hand, as a token of God’s omnipresence. Thus the right fore-quarter was the priest’s portion, that he and his family might not want bread, nor at the same time have superfluities; for whatever remained was burnt on the altar.

33. Shall have the right shoulder — Because this was not easily divisible it could not be shared by the families of the priests in common. Hence it is divinely allotted to him who sprinkles the blood.

V. 34. The wave-breast and heave-shoulder-The breast or heart is the seat of wisdom, and the shoulder of strength for action; and these two may denote that wisdom, and power, which were in Christ our high-priest, and which ought to be in every priest.

Verse 34. The wave-breast, and the heave-shoulder — Hebrew, The breast of elevation, and the shoulder of exaltation; that is, those parts which are consecrated to me by lifting, or heaving them up toward heaven. The breast or heart is the seat of wisdom; and the shoulder, of strength for action; and these two may denote that wisdom and power which were in Christ our High-Priest, and which ought to be in every priest. They also signify that God is to be served with all our heart, mind, and strength. By a statute for ever — An ordinance to continue so long as the law of sacrifice should remain. And the equity of it remains still; for as they who waited at the altar were partakers with the altar, even so hath the Lord ordained that those who preach the gospel should live by the gospel, 1 Corinthians 9:13, 14. In other words, the ministers of Christ, who devote their time and labours to his service and that of the public, have a right to be maintained by the public.

V. 35. Of the anointing of Aaron-That is, of the priesthood; the sign put for the thing signified; and the anointing by a like figure is put for the part of the sacrifices belonging to the priest by virtue of his anointing. This was their portion appointed them by God in that day, and therefore to be given to them in after ages.

Verses 35-37. This is the portion of the anointing — That is, their portion in consequence of their unction to the priests’ office, appointed them by God in that day, and therefore to be given them in after ages. Thus God kindly provides for them that are given up entirely to his service in things sacred. Of the consecration — That is, of the sacrifice offered at the consecration of the priests.

SUMMARY OF PRECEDING LAWS, 35-38.

35. This is the portion of the anointing of Aaron — This is the provision made for those who are anointed priests — the perquisite by virtue of the holy office. The abstract anointing is put for the concrete, the anointed.

Verse 36. In the day that he anointed them] See Clarke’s note on “Exodus 40:15”.

Verses 35-37. This is the portion of the anointing — That is, their portion in consequence of their unction to the priests’ office, appointed them by God in that day, and therefore to be given them in after ages. Thus God kindly provides for them that are given up entirely to his service in things sacred. Of the consecration — That is, of the sacrifice offered at the consecration of the priests.

36. In the day that he anointed them — The command given on that day extends over the whole period of the Aaronic priesthood. A statute for ever — See Leviticus 3:17, note.

V. 37. Of the consecrations-That is, of the sacrifice offered at the consecration of the priests.

Verses 35-37. This is the portion of the anointing — That is, their portion in consequence of their unction to the priests’ office, appointed them by God in that day, and therefore to be given them in after ages. Thus God kindly provides for them that are given up entirely to his service in things sacred. Of the consecration — That is, of the sacrifice offered at the consecration of the priests.

37. Burnt offering — Chap. 1, notes, and Leviticus 6:8-13, notes. Meat offering — Chap. 2, and Leviticus 6:14-18, notes. Sin offering — Chap. 4, notes, and Leviticus 6:25-30. Trespass offering — Chapter 5-6:7; 7:1-7, notes. The consecrations — This consisted in filling the hands of the priests with the things which they were to offer. See Numbers 3:3, note. It is an expressive mode of inducting them into office. This ordinance is not distinctly spoken of in the previous chapters except in part in Leviticus 6:19-23, but the offerings of which the consecration is made up have been already detailed, as will be seen in chap.

8. Peace offerings — Chaps. 3, 7:11-34. notes. “The sacrificial law, therefore, with the five species of sacrifices which it enjoins, embraces every aspect in which Israel was to manifest its true relation to the Lord its God. While the expiatory sacrifices furnished the means of removing the barrier which sins and trespasses had set up between the sinner and the holy God, and procured the forgiveness of sin and guilt, so that the sinner could attain once more to the unrestricted enjoyment of the covenanted grace, the sanctification of the whole man in self-surrender to the Lord was shadowed forth in the burnt offerings, the fruits of this sanctification in the meat offerings, and the blessedness of the possession and enjoyment of saving grace in the peace offerings. Nevertheless the sacrifices could not make those who drew near to God with them and in them “perfect as pertaining to the conscience,” (Hebrews 9:9; 10:1,) because the blood of bulls and of goats could not possibly take away sin. Hebrews 10:4. The forgiveness of sin which the atoning sacrifices procured was only a paresiv (a passing by) of past sins through the forbearance of God, (Romans 3:25, 26,) in anticipation of the true sacrifice of Christ, of which the animal sacrifices were only a type, and by which the justice of God is satisfied, and the way opened for full forgiveness of sin and complete reconciliation to God.” — Keil. See Introduction, 5, 6, 7. CONCLUDING NOTE.

That this sacrificial code was burdensome will not be denied by those who have enjoyed the more glorious dispensation of the Spirit. There is a striking contrast between the sacrificial law and “the law of liberty” in Christ Jesus our Lord. The great purpose of the first was the ushering in of the second. In this regard not only the moral law but the ceremonial, also, was our paidagwgov, child-leader, to bring us to Christ. All the shadows adumbrate him; all the types prefigure him in his various mediatorial offices. This will account for the variety of the sacrifices containing an expiatory element. A subordinate purpose of this variety may have been to prevent that tedium which would have attended one invariable form of sacrifice. Rationalism suggests that this complicated and elaborate system was devised simply to keep the Israelites so busily employed that they would have no inclination to adopt the idolatries of the surrounding nations, especially the religious rites with which they had become familiar in Egypt. But the suggestion that God has created any thing for the sole purpose of filling a vacuum is not only a reflection on his wisdom, but a glaring indication of a lack, on the part of Rationalism, of that true spirit of philosophy which is satisfied only with the discovery of worthy final causes of things. “These rites and ceremonies were minute, in order to impress upon the Jewish mind, and upon the mind of humanity itself, the great ideas of substitution, atonement, vicarious sacrifice; till this idea became so familiarized to the hearts of mankind that they should be able not only to appreciate, but to hail with joy and gratitude that perfect atonement of which these were the shadows, saying, each of them, ‘We are voices crying in the wilderness, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world!’” — Dr. Cummings.

Verse 38. In the wilderness of Sinai.] These laws were probably given to Moses while he was on the mount with God; the time was quite sufficient, as he was there with God not less than fourscore days in all; forty days at the giving, and forty days at the renewing of the law.

As in the course of this book the different kinds of sacrifices commanded to be offered are repeatedly occurring, I think it best, once for all, to give a general account of them, and a definition of the original terms, as well as of all others relative to this subject which are used in the Old Testament, and the reference in which they all stood to the great sacrifice offered by Christ.

1. אשם ASHAM, TRESPASS-offering, from אשם asham, to be guilty, or liable to punishment; for in this sacrifice the guilt was considered as being transferred to the animal offered up to God, and the offerer redeemed from the penalty of his sin, Leviticus 7:37. Christ is said to have made his soul an offering for sin, (אשם,) Isaiah 53:10.

2. hva ISHSHEH, FIRE-offering, probably from vva ashash, to be grieved, angered, inflamed; either pointing out the distressing nature of sin, or its property of incensing Divine justice against the offender, who, in consequence, deserving burning for his offence, made use of this sacrifice to be freed from the punishment due to his transgression. It occurs Exodus 29:18, and in many places of this book.

3. הבהבים HABHABIM, ITERATED OR REPEATED offerings, from bhy yahab, to supply. The word occurs only in Hosea 8:13, and probably means no more than the continual repetition of the accustomed offerings, or continuation of each part of the sacred service.

4. jbz ZEBACH, a SACRIFICE, (in Chaldee, jbd debach, the z zain being changed into d daleth,) a creature slain in sacrifice, from jbz zabach, to slay; hence the altar on which such sacrifices were offered was termed jbzm mizbeach, the place of sacrifice. See Clarke’s note on “Genesis 8:20”. Zebach is a common name for sacrifices in general.

5. gj CHAG, a festival, especially such as had a periodical return, from ggj chagag, to celebrate a festival, to dance round and round in circles. See Exodus 5:1; 12:24. The circular dance was probably intended to point out the revolution of the heavenly bodies, and the exact return of the different seasons. See Parkhurst.

6. tacj CHATTATH and hacj CHATTAAH, SIN-offering, from acj chata, to miss the mark; it also signifies sin in general, and is a very apt term to express its nature by. A sinner is continually aiming at and seeking happiness; but as he does not seek it in God, hence the Scripture represents him as missing his aim, or missing the mark. This is precisely the meaning of the Greek word amaptia, translated sin and sin-offering in our version; and this is the term by which the Hebrew word is translated both by the Septuagint and the inspired writers of the New Testament. The sin-offering was at once an acknowledgment of guilt, in having forsaken the fountain of living waters, and hewed out cisterns that could hold none; and also of the firm purpose of the offerer to return to God, the true and pure fountain of blessedness. This word often occurs. See Clarke’s notes on “Genesis 4:7”; and “Genesis 13:13”.

7. rpk COPHER, the EXPIATION or ATONEMENT, from rpk caphar, to cover, to smear over, or obliterate, or annul a contract. Used often to signify the atonement or expiation made for the pardon or cancelling of iniquity. See Clark’s note on “Exodus 25:17”.

8. מועד MOED, an APPOINTED annual festival, from יעד yaad, to appoint or constitute, signifying such feasts as were instituted in commemoration of some great event or deliverance, such as the deliverance from Egypt. See Exodus 13:10, and thus differing from the chag mentioned above. See Clarke’s note on “Genesis 1:14”.

9. מלאים MILLUIM, CONSECRATIONS or consecration-offerings, from alm mala, to fill; those offerings made in consecrations, of which the priests partook, or, in the Hebrew phrase, had their hands filled, or which had filled the hands of them that offered them. See Clarke’s note on “Exodus 29:19”; and see 2 Chronicles 13:9.

10. hjnm MINCHAH, MEAT-offering, from jn nach, to rest, settle after toil. It generally consisted of things without life, such as green ears of corn, full ears of corn, flour, oil, and frankincense; (see on Leviticus 2:1, &c.;) and may be considered as having its name from that rest from labour and toil which a man had when the fruits of the autumn were brought in, or when, in consequence of obtaining any rest, ease, &c., a significant offering or sacrifice was made to God. It often occurs. See Clarke’s note on “Genesis 4:3”. The jealousy-offering (Numbers 5:15) was a simple minchah, consisting of barley-meal only.

11. Ësm MESECH and Ësmm MIMSACH, a MIXTURE-offering, or MIXED LIBATION, called a DRINK-offering, Isaiah 55:11, from Ësm masach, to mingle; it seems in general to mean old wine mixed with the less, which made it extremely intoxicating. This offering does not appear to have had any place in the worship of the true God; but from Isaiah 65:11, and Proverbs 23:30, it seems to have been used for idolatrous purposes, such as the Bacchanalia among the Greeks and Romans, “when all got drunk in honour of the god.”

12. tacm MASSEETH, an OBLATION, things carried to the temple to be presented to God, from acn nasa, to bear or carry, to bear sin; typically, Exodus 28:38; Leviticus 10:17; 16:21; really, Isaiah 53:4,12. The sufferings and death of Christ were the true masseeth or vicarious bearing of the sins of mankind, as the passage in Isaiah above referred to sufficiently proves. See this alluded to by the Evangelist John, John 1:29; and see the root in Parkhurst.

13. hbdn NEDABAH, FREE-WILL, or voluntary offering; from bdn nadab, to be free, liberal, princely. An offering not commanded, but given as a particular proof of extraordinary gratitude to God for especial mercies, or on account of some vow or engagement voluntarily taken, Leviticus 7:16.

14. Ësn NESECH, LIBATION, OR DRINK-offering, from Ësn nasach, to diffuse or pour out. Water or wine poured out at the conclusion or confirmation of a treaty or covenant. To this kind of offering there is frequent allusion and reference in the New Testament, as it typified the blood of Christ poured out for the sin of the world; and to this our Lord himself alludes in the institution of the holy eucharist. The whole Gospel economy is represented as a covenant or treaty between God and man, Jesus Christ being not only the mediator, but the covenant sacrifice, whose blood was poured out for the ratification and confirmation of this covenant or agreement between God and man.

15. nl[ and hlw[ OLAH, BURNT-offering, from hl[ alah, to ascend, because this offering, as being wholly consumed, ascended as it were to God in smoke and vapour. It was a very expressive type of the sacrifice of Christ, as nothing less than his complete and full sacrifice could make atonement for the sin of the world. In most other offerings the priest, and often the offerer, had a share, but in the whole burnt-offering all was given to God.

16. trcq KETORETH, INCENSE or PERFUME-offering, from rcq katar, to burn, i.e., the frankincense, and other aromatics used as a perfume in different parts of the Divine service. To this St. Paul compares the agreeableness of the sacrifice of Christ to God, Ephesians 5:2: Christ hath given himself for us, an offering-to God for a SWEET-SMELLING savour. From Revelation 5:8 we learn that it was intended also to represent the prayers of the saints, which, offered up on the altar, Christ Jesus, that sanctifies every gift, are highly pleasing in the sight of God.

17. ˆbrq KORBAN, the GIFT-offering, from brq karab to draw nigh or approach. See this explained on Leviticus 1:2. Korban was a general name for any kind of offering, because through these it was supposed a man had access to his Maker.

18. שלמים SHELAMIM, PEACE-offering, from שלם shalam, to complete, make whole; for by these offerings that which was lacking was considered as being now made up, and that which was broken, viz., the covenant of God, by his creatures’ transgression, was supposed to be made whole; so that after such an offering, the sincere and conscientious mind had a right to consider that the breach was made up between God and it, and that it might lay confident hold on this covenant of peace. To this the apostle evidently alludes, Ephesians 2:14-19: He is our peace, (i.e. our shalam or peace-offering,) who has made both one, and broken down the middle wall; having abolished in his flesh the enmity, &c. See the whole passage, and see Clarke’s note on “Genesis 14:18”.

19. hdwt TODAH, THANK-offering, from hdy yadah, to confess; offerings made to God with public confession of his power, goodness, mercy, &c.

20. hpwnt TENUPHAH, WAVE-offering, from ãn naph, to stretch out; an offering of the first-fruits stretched out before God, in acknowledgment of his providential goodness. This offering was moved from the right hand to the left. See Clarke’s note on “Exodus 29:27”.

21. hmwrt TERUMAH, HEAVE-offering, from רם ram, to lift up, because the offering was lifted up towards heaven, as the wave-offering, in token of the kindness of God in granting rain and fruitful seasons, and filling the heart with food and gladness. As the wave-offering was moved from right to left, so the heave-offering was moved up and down; and in both cases this was done several times. These offerings had a blessed tendency to keep alive in the breasts of the people a due sense of their dependence on the Divine providence and bounty, and of their obligation to God for his continual and liberal supply of all their wants. See Clarke’s note on “Exodus 29:27”.

In the above collection are comprised, as far as I can recollect, an explanation of all the terms used in the Hebrew Scriptures which signify sacrifice, oblation, atonement, offering, &c., &c., as well as the reference they bear to the great and only sufficient atonement, sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction made by Christ Jesus for the sins of mankind. Larger accounts must be sought in authors who treat professedly on these subjects. LEVITICUS

Verse 38. In mount Sinai — Rather, by mount Sinai; for Moses had been some time come down from the mount, and these commands were given him from the tabernacle, Leviticus 1:1. He and the people, however, were still in the wilderness of Sinai, or in that tract of land adjoining to the mount, which, being desert and thinly inhabited, is termed a wilderness.

SUMMARY OF PRECEDING LAWS, 35-38.

35. This is the portion of the anointing of Aaron — This is the provision made for those who are anointed priests — the perquisite by virtue of the holy office. The abstract anointing is put for the concrete, the anointed.