others by making Expiation for them when they deserved to perish For so I am commanded These Orders as hath been already observed he received in the holy Mount So Aaron and his sons did all things which the LORD commanded by the hand of Moses This was necessary to be added that all Generations might be assured whatsoever was performed by their Ministry would be effectual to the end for which it was appointed they being exactly Consecrated to God's Service without the least omission of any thing that he had required In like manner our great High-Priest was Consecrated to his Eternal Priesthood by fulfilling all the Will of God and that in a far more Solemn and Publick way than Aaron's was it being performed by Suffering such things as nothing but a perfect Filial Obedience to his heavenly Father could have moved him to admit because it was accomplished by shedding his own Blood in a lingring Death CHAP. IX Ver. 1. Verse 1 AND it came to pass on the eighth day He doth not mean on the eighth day of the Month but on the next day after their Consecration which was seven days in doing VIII 33 35. Then it was that the Fire fell down from Heaven and consumed the Sacrifice which Aaron offered and this seems also to have been the first day of unleavened Bread which fell upon the fifteenth day of this Month for on the fourteenth in the Even which was the last day of the Consecration of the Priests the Passover was kept IX Numb 2 5. That Moses called Aaron and his sons and the Elders of Israel Just as he had done before VIII 2 3. that the Rulers and as many of the People as could meet together to behold what was done might see the Glory of the LORD which appeared at this time v. 6. Ver. 2. Verse 2 And he said unto Aaron take thee a young Calf This is the first Sacrifice that was offered to God by the Priests of the Order of Aaron It differed from that which was offered by Moses for Aaron and his Sons as Egel a young Calf doth from Par a young Bullock by which his Sin was expiated at his Consecration And Maimonides saith that the former signifies a Calf of one year old the latter one of two Others say a Calf was called Egel till his Horns budded and then it was called Par. For a sin-offering For his sins in general not for any determinate Offence like that IV. 3. which therefore was something different from this The Jews fancy that a young Calf was appointed for the first Sin-offering to put Aaron and the People in mind of the Golden Calf which they worshipped So Maimonides reports the Opinion of their Wise men in his More Nevoch P. III. cap. 46. Where he also hath this conceit that it was to expiate that Sin And a Ram for a burnt-offering For none but Males were accepted for Burnt-offerings I. 10. There is no Peace-offering ordered for him as there is afterward for the People v. 4. because it was not fit he should have all the Sacrifice as he must have had according to the Law of such Sacrifices being both the Priest and the Offerer between whom and the Priest after the Fat was burnt all was to be shared Ver. 3. Verse 3 And unto the Children of Israel thou shalt speak saying Unto all the Elders v. 1. who were to bring the following Offerings in the Name of all the People of Israel and that by Aaron's direction who was now to act as God's High-Priest and gave out this Order Take ye a Kid of the Goats for a sin-offering The Hebrew word Seir signifies a He-goat Concerning which Maimonides in his Book concerning Sacrifices delivers this opinion That all Sacrifices for sin whether of private Persons or the whole Congregation at their three principal Feasts New Moons and the Day of Expiation were He-goats For this reason because the greatest Sin and Rebellion of those times was that they sacrificed to Daemons who were wont to appear in that form For which he quotes XVII 7. They shall no more offer their Sacrifices lasseirim which we translate unto Devils but the word Seirim is but the Plural Number of the word Seir which signifies a Goat And further he adds That their Wise men think the Sin of the whole Congregation was therefore expiated by this Kid of a Goat because all the Family of Israel sinned about a Goat when they fold Joseph into Egypt XXXVII Gen. 31. And such reasons saith he as these should not seem trifles for the end and scope of all these Actions was to imprint and ingrave on the Mind of Sinners the Offences they had committed that they might never forget them According to that of David LI Psal 5. My sin is ever before me This Sin-offering was different from that IV. 14. being not for any particular Sin as that was but in general for all the Offences that the High-Priest might have committed A Calf and a Lamb both of the first year c. When they were in their prime Ver. 4. Verse 4 Also a Bullock and a Ram. These also were no doubt to be without blemish as is prescribed in the two foregoing Offerings And the Hebrew word Sor which we translate a Bullock often signifies a well grown Ox as in XXI Exod. 28. XXV Deut. 8. As Ajil a Ram the Hebrews say signifies a Sheep of above a year old These made very large Peace-offerings and consequently a liberal Feast upon them For peace-offerings The very same order is here observed that was at Aaron's Consecration First sin-Sin-offerings then a Burnt-offering and then a Peace-offering was offered to the LORD VIII 14 18 22. And a meat-offering mingled with oil Which was to compleat the peace-Peace-offerings on which they were to feast that Meat might not be without Bread to it For to day the LORD will appear to you Give you an illustrious Token of his Presence by sending Fire from Heaven or from the Brightness of his GLORY to consume the Sacrifice v. 23 24. Whereby they were all assured that both the Institution of this Priesthood and the Sacrifices offered by it were acceptable to the Divine Majesty Ver. 5. Verse 5 And they brought that which Moses commanded Both Aaron v. 2. and all the Congregation v. 3. brought all the Offerings which Moses required Before the Tabernacle of the Congregation Where these Sacrifices were to be offered And all the Congregation drew near and stood before the LORD Approached to the door of the Tabernacle and stood there by their Sacrifices looking towards the Holy Place and worshipped the LORD Ver. 6. Verse 6 And Moses said Unto the Congregation This is the thing which the LORD commanded that ye should do I require this of you by the commandment of God who will demonstrate by a visible Token his Presence among you And the glory of the LORD shall appear unto you That Glory which filled the Tabernacle when it was erected
contra Julianum condemned these Sacrifices of Beasts as hateful to their Gods who they fancied were pleased only with those that were made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Fruits of the Earth and of Frankincense But they might have learnt from Moses if they had pleased Julian and Porphyry being acquainted with his Books that these things were alike acceptable God having respect to the Mind of him that offered not to his Gifts Ver. 3. Verse 3 And the remnant of the meat-offering shall be Aarons and his sons To be eaten by them But that Meat-offering which was offered for the Priests themselves was to be wholly burnt and no part eaten VI. 22 23. It is a thing most holy of the offerings of the LORD made by fire Nothing is more known then the distinction which the Jews make between things most holy and the lighter holy things as their phrase is which I took notice of before The most holy were such as none whatsoever might eat of or none but the Priests and the Sons of Priests and that only in the Sanctuary and no where else See VI. 16 26. Such were all whole Burnt-offerings all the Sin-offerings and all the Peace-offerings for the whole Congregation The lighter holy things were such as might be eaten by those who were not Priests in any place within the City of Jerusalem to which their Camp now answered and such were all the Peace-offerings of particular Persons the Paschal Lamb the Tenth and the Firstlings of Cattle Ver. 4. Verse 4 And if thou bring an oblation of a meat-offering baken in the oven This is the first sort of baked Mincha's for the preparing of which there was an Oven in the Court of the Tabernacle as afterward there was in the Court of the Temple 1 Chron. XXIII 28 29. XLVI Ezek. 20. It shall be unleavened cakes of fine flour mingled with oil or unleavened wafers anointed with oil If the Cakes were thick then the Oil was kneaded together with them But if they were thin like a Wafer then it was only spread upon it before it was baked See XXIX Exod. 2. or as some will have it after it came out of the Oven Concerning its being unleavened see below v. 11. Ver. 5. Verse 5 And if thy oblation be a meat-offering baken in a pan Or in a flat Plate as we translate it in the Margin For Maimonides says this was the difference between Macabath which is the Hebrew word in this place and Marchesheth that the former was a Pan or Plate without any Rim about it and the other had one as our Frying-pans have And so Abarbinel in his Preface to this Book observes out of Jarchi that there was a Vessel in the Temple which was only flat and broad but had no rising on the sides of it So that the Oil being poured upon it when it was set on the fire ran down and increased the Flame and made the Cake hard It shall be of fine flour unleavened mingled with oil This sort of Cake seems to have been both kneaded with Oil and to have had Oil also poured upon it after it was laid upon the Plate Ver. 6. Verse 6 Thou shalt part it in pieces c. This according to Abarbinel was done as it lay baking upon the Plate Or if this Division was made after it was taken off the reason was the same because part of it was to be given to God and the rest to the Priests And pour oil thereon Upon the pieces that they might by this new Addition of fresh Oil be made more savoury It is a meat-offering And therefore to be eaten with Oil v. 1. Ver. 7. Verse 7 And if thy oblation be a meat-offering baken in the frying-pan This Vessel was not flat but deep as Abarbinel observes See v. 5. because that which was baked in it was moist and fluid It shall be made of fine flour with oil The Oil was not kneaded with this sort of Mincha but put into the Pan so that it mixed with the Flour which might be shaken and moved up and down as things are which are baken in Liquors So Abarbinels words are in his Preface to this Book Ver. 8. Verse 8 And thou shalt bring the meat-offering that is made of these things unto the LORD c. This relates to all the bake meat-Meat-offerings before-mentioned which were to be brought to the LORD at his House and there presented to the Priest who was to bring them to the Altar when they were prepared as before directed See v. 1 2. And this variety of Mincha's was allowed that the Table of the LORD i. e. the Altar might be furnished and his Ministers that waited on him entertained with all sorts of Provisions Ver. 9. Verse 9 And the Priest shall take from the meat-offering a memorial thereof A part of the Cake of whatsoever sort it was was separated from the rest for the LORD's portion to whom it was offered as an acknowledgment of his Supream Dominion over them and in commemoration of his goodness to them And shall burn it upon the Altar Before the other parts were eaten by the Priests as was directed before about the fine Flour v. 2. It is an offering made by fire of a sweet savour unto the LORD See v. 2. Ver. 10. Verse 10 And that which is left of the meat-offering shall be Aarons and his sons c. All this Verse hath been explained v. 3. Ver. 11. Verse 11 No meat-offering which ye shall bring unto the LORD shall be made with leaven These words which ye shall bring unto the LORD seem to have a peculiar emphasis in this place importing that no Meat-offering part of which was offered upon God's Altar should be leavened For no part of that leavened Bread which was offered in Eucharistical Sacrifices VII 13. nor the two Loaves offered in the Feast of Pentecost which some mistake for an Exception to this Precept were offered upon the Altar but given intirely to the Priests as their portion Made with leaven There are many Moral Reasons given both by Jewish and Christian Writers why none of the Cakes before-mentioned should have any Leaven in them which I shall not here set down There is some probability in their Opinion who think this was ordered to refresh their Memory by putting them in mind of their Deliverance out of Egypt But Maimonides seems to me to have given the best account of this in his More Nevochim P. III. cap. 46. where he saith God prohibited this to root out the Idolatrous Customs in those days as he found in the Books of the Zabij who offered to their Gods no Bread but leavened Next to this the Account which Abarbanel gives of it is not to be disregarded who thinks it was forbidden because it would have made delay if they had waited at the Tabernacle till the fermentation was perfected For ye shall burn no leaven nor any honey in any offering of the LORD made by fire
Mr. Selden L. III. de Synedr cap. 11. n. 6. where he likewise observes that Chiskuni is of opinion that such of the Family of the Priests as were both excluded from their Ministry in the Sanctuary and from wearing the holy Garments by reason of some defect in their Bodies were permitted to perform this Office of carrying away the Ashes And carry forth the Ashes without the Camp into a clean place See IV. 12. The fore-mentioned Rasi will have it that they needed not to take away all the Ashes every day but only a shovel full which they laid beside the Altar And when the hollow place of the Altar was so full that there was no room to lay on the Wood they were bound to empty it and carry all the Ashes away Ver. 12. Verse 12 And the fire upon the Altar shall be burning in it it shall not be put out This Precept is repeated again in the next Verse as it was mentioned once before v. 9. For which there is a just reason as Abarbanel makes account For in the ninth Verse he requires that the Wood for the Evening Sacrifice should be so ordered and attended that the fire might be kept in till the Morning And then here in this Verse he requires there should such care be used in taking away the Ashes that the fire might still remain and not be extinguished After which speaking of the Morning Sacrifice in the latter part of this Verse he requires in the next v. 13. that such a quantity of Wood should be laid on the Altar when they offered it that the fire might be kept in till the Evening Sacrifice or that if there were any extraordinary Sacrifices brought besides the daily Burnt-offering the Priests should still add more Wood that the fire might not be put out by that means but be able to devour them And the Priest shall burn wood on it every morning c. The Hebrew word for Wood being in the Plural Number R. Levi of Barcelona concludes there were more bundles than one brought in every day And from this place and I. 7. he gathers there were three The first of which he calls the great heap with which the daily Sacrifice and the rest for which there was occasion were offered of which he thinks Moses speaks in the ninth Verse of this Chapter The second was lesser which was laid at the side of the other that they might have Coals for the burning Incense and this he thinks intended here And the third was meerly to keep in the fire perpetually of which he thinks Moses speaks in the next Verse The Misna also tells us that there being seven Gates to the great Court of the Sanctuary three on the North and as many on the South and one at the East the first on the South-side was called the Gate of burning because at that Gate they brought in the Wood which was to preserve the fire perpetually on the Altar See Codex Middoth cap. 1. sect 4. And he shall burn thereon the fat of the peace-offerings This fat of the Peace-offerings was to be burnt together with the Burnt-offering and not separate from it by which means the Burnt-offering was the sooner consumed and more room was made for other occasional Sacrifices Ver. 13. Verse 13 And the fire shall be ever burning upon the Altar This fire was not kindled by the Priests but by God himself who sent it from Heaven to consume the first Sacrifice that was offered by Aaron IX ult From which time they were bound to take care that it never went out that so their Sacrifices might be constantly offered by Celestial fire because it was the continuation of that fire which came from Heaven by a continual addition of Fewel whereby it was preserved And so it continued as the Jews affirm till the Captivity of Babylon and after it as some of them would have us believe who fancy it was preserved in a Pit by the care of some religious Priests till their return though against the common Tradition among them which is That there was no sacred fire in the second Temple for they reckon this among the five things which were wanting there and had been in the first And as for the constant continuance of this fire there was care taken that wood should be laid up in the Temple for the maintenance of it so in order thereunto there was a certain set time when the People were obliged to carry wood thither which made a kind of Festival called by Josephus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. II. de Bello Judaico cap. 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. it being the Feast of the Wood-carrying when it was the custom for all to bring up Wood for the Altar that there might be no want of Fewel for the fire which was never to go out It shall never go out This was a thing so famous that it was imitated among the Gentiles who thought it ominous to have their Sacred fire go out and therefore appointed Persons on purpose to watch it and keep it perpetually burning as appears by the Vestal Virgins at Rome whose great business it was to look after the Eternal fire as they called it imagining the extinction of it purported 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the destruction of the City as Dionysius Halicarn speaks This Institution is ascribed both by him and by Plutarch unto Romulus into whose History many things were translated by the ancient Pagans out of these Sacred Records of Moses as the Learned Huetius hath made probable in his Demonstratio Evangel Propos IV. cap. 9. n. 8. The Greeks also preserved such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inextinguishable fire at Delph and the Persians in like manner and many other People as Bochartus hath shown in his Hierozoicon P. I. L. II. cap. 35. and Dilheirus before him in a special Dissertation as he calls it de Catozelia Gentilium cap. 11. where he hath heaped up a great deal to this purpose and among other things hath this conjecture that the Grecian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Roman Vesta had their Names from the Hebrew word Esch or the Chaldean Escha which signifie fire The conjecture of David Chytraeus also is no less ingenious who derives those Names from Eschgal the fire of the LORD Ver. 14. Verse 14 And this is the law of the meat-offering He doth not speak of the Offerings which accompanied the daily Burnt-offerings but of those which were offered alone mentioned in the second Chapter Where directions are given of what they should consist and also how much the Priest should have for his portion but here are some things added concerning the place where they should be eaten by the Priests and concerning those Meat-offerings which were peculiarly to be offered for themselves The sons of Aaron shall offer it before the LORD before the Altar Or rather upon the Altar for so the Hebrew phrase on the face of the Altar signifies Or else
the meaning is he shall present it to the LORD before the Altar and then afterward as is directed in the next Verse burn an handful of it upon the Altar And so the Rule is Chapter second v. 8 9. When it is presented to the Priest he shall bring it to the Altar c. Ver. 15. Verse 15 And he shall take of it his handful of the flour of the meat-offering c. According to the prescription in the second Chapter v. 2. where all this Verse is explained Ver. 16. Verse 16 And the remainder thereof shall Aaron and his sons eat If they had no pollution upon them XXII 6. See Chapt. II. 3. The reason of the Precept was as R. Levi Barcel observes Praecept CXXXIII that it preserved the dignity of the Sacrifice to have it eaten only by the Priests and by them I may add only in the holy place and not carried out from thence as it here follows With unleavened bread shall it be eaten There is nothing in the Hebrew Text to answer unto the word with which makes the sense unaccountable that otherwise is easie and natural If we translate it as the Hebrew words plainly signifie unleavened it shall be eaten See X. 12. In the holy place There was a room in the Court of the Priests where they ate these holy things as Kimchi observes upon XLII Ezek. Which may be confirmed out of XVIII Numb 10. where the most holy place can signifie nothing but the Court of the Priests as L'Empereur rightly understands it in his Annot. upon Middoth cap. 2. sect 6. In the Court of the Tabernacle of the Congregation they shall eat it As the Priests did eat it in their own Court so their Male-children had a place in the Court of the Israelites wherein to eat it X. 12 13. And they are all said to eat before the LORD because this was a part of the Tabernacle as was also the Court of the Women where there was a place for the Priest's Daughters to eat as well as their Sons of the Firstlings that were offered to the LORD XVIII Numb 19. Ver. 17. Verse 17 It shall not be baken with leaven There were two little rooms at the East-gate of the Court of the Temple called The Gate of Nicanor one of which was a Vestry for the Priests to put on their Garments when they went to Minister and the other was for baking this flour and that mentioned v. 21. So they tell us in Middoth cap. 1. sect 4. And therefore it is ordered to be baken without leaven because it was a part of the LORD's Sacrifice which being offered unleavened Chapt. second v. 11. the remainder must needs be unleavened also because the whole was God's and the Priests could have it no other ways than it was offered unto him I have given it to them for their portion of my offerings made by fire That is of the Meat-offerings before-mentioned It is most holy c. This is the reason why it was not to be carried to be eaten out of the holy place See Chapt. second v. 10. As is the sin-offering and as the trespass-offering See v. 26. and VII 6. Ver. 18. Verse 18 All the males among the children of Aaron shall eat of it And none but they because it was a thing most holy It shall be a statute for ever in your generations That is as long as the Law about Sacrifices shall last Every one that toucheth them shall be holy According to this translation of these words the meaning is That it was not sufficient to be descended of Priests and to be Males but they were also to be free from any legal defilement who were admitted to eat of this Offering XXII 6. But these very words which we here translate every one in the 27th Verse we translate whatsoever and then the meaning is Every thing that toucheth them shall be made holy by them That is the very Dishes into which such holy things were put or the Spoons or Knives wherewith they were eaten were never to be imployed to any other use See XXIX Exod. 37. Ver. 19. Verse 19 And the LORD spake unto Moses saying At the same time the LORD gave direction about another Offering near of kin to the former but not yet mentioned Ver. 20. Verse 20 This is the offering of Aaron and his sons which they shall offer unto the LORD The Jews call this a Mincah of imitation which every High-Priest and every other Priest as they understand it were bound to offer when they were Consecrated and the High-Priest to continue every day as long as he lived So Abarbanel in his Preface to this Book Section 2. reckoning the various sorts of Meat-offerings makes this the fourth kind which the High-Priest offered every day and every other Priest once in his Life viz. when he first was admitted to Minister at the Altar at the Age of twenty years For both these Meat-offerings saith he are comprehended in this Verse But it may as well be understood only of Aaron and his Successors in the Priesthood of whom the following words seem to speak and not of the common Priests In the day when he is anointed The Hebrew word bejom may be translated from the day and so the Jews understand it that he was to make this Oblation not only upon the day of his Consecration but ever after as I said every day as long as he continued in the Priesthood And so the next words seem to explain it The tenth part of an Ephah of fine flour for a meat-offering perpetual half thereof in the morning and half at night The High-Priest saith Josephus L. III. Antiq. cap. 10. sacrificed twice every day at his own charges and then he describes this very Offering which was distinct from that which attended the daily Burnt-offering as appears by the quantity of this Meat-offering and by the manner of ordering it For that seems to have been raw Flower mixed with Oil but this baken as it follows in the next Verse See XXIX Exod 40 41. The reason why it is here mentioned is because it was a Mincah or Meat-offering of whose Rites Moses is treating and this is an Exception from the rest Ver. 21. Verse 21 In a pan shall it be made with Oil. With three logs of Oil as the Jews determine And when it is baken See v. 17. Thou shalt bring it in Unto the Altar And the baken pieces shalt thou offer c. If it was a Meat-offering of the High-Priest it was divided into XII pieces as Maimonides saith if of a common Priest for they will have both to be included in this Law then into X pieces which were so exactly divided that half of them were offered in the Morning and the other half in the Evening And the handful of Frankincense which they say was offered with them was in like manner divided and burnt on the Altar Maase Korban cap. 13. Ver. 22. Verse 22 And the Priest of
his sons that is anointed in his stead shall offer it What he had said of Aaron and his Sons in general v. 20. he now particularly requires of every Son of his that should succeed him in his office For which there was the greater necessity because as R. Levi of Barcelona understands it Praecept CXXXIV the High-Priest was an Ambassador between the Israelites and their Heavenly Father by whom their Prayers were offered to God and who made Reconciliation for them and therefore should be bound in all reason to offer a perpetual Sacrifice twice every day for the constant needs of the Congregation and to apply his Mind to this as he speaks that he and they might be the better for it It is a Statute for ever unto the LORD As long as that Priesthood continued It shall be wholly burnt In which it differed from other meat-Meat-offerings as will appear in the next Verse Ver. 23. Verse 23 For every meat-offering for the Priest Or of the Priest This may seem to relate to every common Priest who were not all bound to offer this Sacrifice every day but only he who did it in the name of all the rest viz. the Priest who offered the daily Burnt-Sacrifice He may be well thought to have been obliged to this by which means this Meat-offering was offered to God every day by one or other of them and never omitted But Abarbanel as I noted before v. 20. thinks that only the High-Priest was bound to offer this Meat-offering every day and every other Priest once in his Life viz. when he began his Ministry Shall be wholly burnt it shall not be eaten The Priests had all the Meat-offerings which were brought by the People except one handful which was offered to the LORD See Chapt. second v. 2 3. But of their own meat-Meat-offerings they were not to taste but wholly burnt them on the Altar For it had not been seemly for him both to offer unto God and to eat of it as if it were his own as Maimonides speaks P. III. More Nevoch cap. 46. or as R. Levi Barcelonita gives the reason Praecept CXLI the scope of the Sacrifice being to raise the Mind of him that offered it unto God it was not fit he should think of eating any part of his own Offering which would have taken his Mind off from God Ver. 24. Verse 24 And the LORD spake unto Moses saying He added further several things concerning other Offerings which perhaps were delivered at the same time with the foregoing being still concerning the Priests See v. 8 9. And therefore the next Verse begins thus Speak unto Aaron and his sons saying Ver. 25. Verse 25 This is the Law of the sin-offering That is for particular Persons that for the Priests themselves being governed by another Law For it is plain that in the IVth Chapter he distinguishes the Sin-offerings into two kinds one whose Blood was carried into the Sanctuary and the Flesh of it burnt intirely without the Camp v. 7 8 c. and here v. 30. and another whose Blood was not carried into the Sanctuary the Flesh of which the Priests were to eat as is here directed In the place where the burnt-offering is killed shall the sin-offering be killed before the LORD See IV. 24 29 31. It is most holy This is the reason of what follows that none might eat of it but those who were holy to the LORD Ver. 26. Verse 26 The Priest that offereth it for sin shall eat it The Flesh of this Sin-offering fell to the share of him who offered the Sacrifice that day and to his Male-children though he might invite any other Priests and their Sons to partake with him if he pleased as appears from v. 29. I need not add that the Immurim as the Hebrews call them were excepted that is the Fat c. mentioned III. 9 10. IV. 26. which were to be wholly burnt upon the Altar In the holy place shall it be eaten c. See v. 16. For it being mostly holy as the words are in the conclusion of the foregoing Verse it was to be eaten in the holy place and that the same day and night when it it was offered and none of it to be kept till the morning Whereas some of their Peace-offerings which they called the lighter holy things might be eaten the next day VII 16. See Maimonides More Nevochim P. III. cap. 46. This seems to have been imitated by the Heathen who required that their most holy Sacrifices should not be carried out of the Temple as the Scholiast upon Aristophanes his Equites observes concerning the Sacrifices offered to Ceres and Proserpina 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ver. 27. Verse 27 Whosoever shall touch the flesh thereof shall be holy See v. 18. And when there is sprinkled of the blood thereof upon any garment This is commonly understood of the Priest's Garment who alone sprinkled the Blood But his Garments being holy the Blood that might chance to fall upon them was not thereby at all dishonoured and therefore if this be the meaning we are to understand that the Garments would appear less venerable when they were spotted with Blood and upon that account were to be washed If we take it for the Garment of him that brought the Sacrifice which when it was killed the Blood might chance to spurt upon his Clothes then the washing of them was out of reverence to the Blood which being holy was not to remain upon a common Garment Which way soever it be interpreted the intention it is manifest was to preserve in their Minds an awful regard to God and to whatsoever belonged unto his Service Thou shalt wash that wherein it was sprinkled in the holy place Where there was a Room after the Temple was built which was called Lischath hagullah the Chamber of the Spring or Well out of which Water was drawn for the use of the Court of the Sanctuary And there it is probable these Garments were washed See Codex Middoth cap. 5. sect 3. Ver. 28. Verse 28 But the earthen vessel wherein it is sodden shall be broken For it being very porous might so deeply imbibe a tincture from the Flesh that it could not be washed out but the smell of it might remain a long time And being of a small value it was no great loss to have it broken rather than any thing that was holy remaining in it be profaned What became of the broken shreds of these earthen Vessels is a doubt among the Hebrew Doctors because it was neither fit to throw them out into a prophane place nor yet seemly to heap them up in the Sanctuary and therefore they fancy the Earth opened and swallowed them up as a great Man in this kind of Learning J. Wagenseil hath observed upon the Mischna of Sota cap. 3. But they might have rather said that they were thrown abroad into a clean place after they were broken into small bits or crumbled to powder just as
slain and divided the Priest was to put what belonged unto the LORD into the Man 's own hands viz. the Fat with the Breast and the Shoulder that he might present it himself unto the Divine Majesty That the breast may be waved for a wave-offering before the LORD This is the manner wherein it was to be presented the Man was to lift it up over his head and wave it to and fro his hands being supported and guided by the Priest See XXIX Exod. 24. and VI Numb 19 20. Maimonides describes the order of it in this manner first the Priest put into the Man's hands the Fat and then laid upon it the Breast and the Shoulder and after that one of the pieces of the Cakes for the Meat-offering upon them all which he waved about Ver. 31. Verse 31 And the Priest shall burn the fat upon the Altar but the breast shall be Aarons and his sons When that part which belonged to God's Altar viz. the Fat had been burnt there the Priests had the Breast and the Shoulder to their own use as Servants have what comes from their Master's Table For it was all offered unto God v. 29 30. who taking only the Fat for himself bad them take the rest viz. the Breast and the Shoulder which had been presented unto God by waving them to and fro as a Sacrifice to the LORD of the World but by him bestowed upon his Ministers for their maintenance in his Service This is more fully expressed in the three next Verses in which there is no difficulty and therefore I shall but lightly touch them Ver. 32. Verse 32 And the right shoulder shall ye give unto the Priests c. This is only a more particular declaration what belonged to the Priest who was to have not only the Breast before-mentioned but also the right Shoulder Ver. 33. Verse 33 He among the sons of Aaron that offereth the blood of the peace-offerings and the fat shall have the right shoulder for his part This is still a more special direction providing for the incouragement of that Priest who on that day ministred at the Altar unto whom the right Shoulder was appropriated as a reward of his pains in offering the Sacrifice Ver. 34. Verse 34 For the wave-breast and the heave-shoulder have I taken of the children of Israel from off the sacrifice of their peace-offerings and have given them to Aaron and his sons c. This doth not contradict what I observed just before for when he saith he hath given these to Aaron the Priest and his Sons the meaning must be to those of his Sons who at the time when these were offered sprinkled the Blood and burnt the fat Ver. 35. Verse 35 This is the portion of the anointing of Aaron and of the anointing of his sons c. In the Hebrew the words are This is the anointing of Aaron c. That is this they have in right of their Unction to the Priest's Office which intitles them to all before-mentioned In the day The Hebrew word Bejom may both here and in the next Verse be translated as I observed before VI. 20. from the day and ever after When he presented them to minister unto the LORD in the Priests office Made them draw near to attend upon him at his Altar Ver. 36. Verse 36 Which the LORD commanded to be given them in the day that he anointed them c. By virtue of a Grant from God when they were made Priests to enjoy this benefit in all future Ages By a statute for ever c. As long as this Law of Sacrifices and this Priesthood shall last See VI. 22. Ver. 37. Verse 37 This is the law of the burnt-offering of the meat-offering and of the sin-offering and of the trespass-offering c. This Verse contains a Summary of what he had commanded Aaron and his Sons from the ninth Verse of the sixth Chapter unto this place And of the Consecrations The whole order of their Consecration is not here directed but in XXIX Exod. only something belonging to that matter VI. 20 c. Ver. 38. Verse 38 Which the LORD commanded Moses in mount Sinai In that mountainous Country which lay near to Mount Sinai as Maimonides truly expounds it For he was come down from Mount Sinai and had delivered to them all that he received there XXXIV Exod. 29 32. before these Commands were given but they still continued near unto it and so the word behar may be translated by mount Sinai For as the last words of this Verse tells us they were still in the Wilderness of Sinai that is in that part of the Wilderness which took its name from its nearness to Mount Sinai In the day that he commanded the children of Israel to offer their oblations unto the LORD c. This doth not precisely signifie that he commanded Aaron and his Sons VI. 9 c. all these things on the very same day that he commanded the Children of Israel what Oblations to bring Chapt. I. 2 c. but they were delivered all at the same time immediately after the other without any other Commandments intervening CHAP. VIII Ver. 1. Verse 1 AND the LORD spake unto Moses saying See IV. 1. Ver. 2. Verse 2 Take Aaron and his sons with him Having delivered the Laws and Rules about Sacrifices and the Rites belonging to them he now prepares the Priests to offer them as had been commanded And there is not much said in this Chapter but what hath been explained in XXIâ— Exod. and other neighbouring Chapters where he relates the Orders he received in Mount Sinai about those things which were now performed And the garments XXVIII Exod. 2 4. And the anointing oil XXX Exod. 24 c. And a bullock for the sin-offering and two rams and a basket of unleavened bread See XXIX Exod. 1 2 3 c. These were in their kind the very best of the legal Sacrifices as appears in part from that Expression of the Psalmist LXIX Psalm 30 31. where he prefers Thanksgiving and Praise before a Bullock that hath Horns and Hoofs a young Bullock which began to spread its Horns and Hoofs that is before the very best of all their bloody Sacrifices Ver. 3. Verse 3 And gather thou all the Congregation together c. All the Elders of the People with the great Officers who were set over Thousands and Hundreds c. For these are frequently called by the Name of Col ha Edah which we translate all the Congregation particularly in XXV Numb 7. XXXV 12. XX Josh 6. XXI Judg. 10 13 16. where the Elders of the Congregation and the Congregation and all the Congregation are plainly the same thing Which is further confirmed from the next Chapter of this Book v. 1. where it is said expresly Moses called Aaron and his Sons and the Elders of Israel Ver. 4. Verse 4 And Moses did as the LORD commanded Summoned them to appear before the LORD And the assembly
XL Exod. 34 35. openly showed it self to them all v. 23. and declared his Grace and Favour towards them by consuming their Sacrifice as an acceptable Oblation to him v. 24. Whereby a particular Honour also was done unto Aaron who was hereby most illustriously owned to be God's High-Priest and all other Persons deterred from pretending to his Office Ver. 7. Verse 7 And Moses said unto Aaron Go unto the Altar and offer thy sin-offering and thy burnt-offering One of them after the other in the order wherein they were directed viz. his Sin-offering first to make his Burnt-offering accepted Make an atonement for thy self and for the people First for himself as the Apostle observes VII Hebr. 27. that then he might be capable to offer for the Sins of the People This was the great imperfection of the Aaronical Priests that they were Sinners like other Men by reason whereof they were bound as for the people so also for themselves to offer for sins V Hebr. 3. And offer the offering of the people and make an atonement for them After he had offered both the Sin-offering v. 8. and the Burnt-offering v. 13. for himself then he was to begin to offer for the People For his own Sins being expiated and his Burnt-offering being accepted he was fit to procure Remission and Acceptance for them Ver. 8. Verse 8 Aaron therefore went unto the Altar That he might be ready to perform his part of the Service which was to sprinkle the Blood after he had first of all offered the Morning Sacrifice See v. 17. And slew the Calf of the sin-offering which was for himself Ordered it to be slain for this was no part of the Priests work as I showed upon the first Chapter v. 5. Ver. 9. Verse 9 And the sons of Aaron brought the blood unto him They received it in Basons as it run from the Calf when it was killed See I. 5. and brought it unto him who stood at the Altar to receive it and do what follows And he dipt his finger in the blood The fore-finger of the right hand which had been sanctified to this Ministry by putting the Blood of the Sacrifice of Consecration upon the thumb of the right hand VIII 23 24. whereby we grasp all things and cannot hold them strongly nor perform any thing well if that be wanting And put it upon the horns of the Altar c. See IV. 25. Ver. 10. Verse 10 But the fat and the kidneys and the caul above the liver See IV. 8 9. He burnt upon the Altar as the LORD commanded Moses Laid or disposed them upon the Altar to be burnt by the heavenly fire v. 24. as most understand it And the LXX justifie this Opinion who though they here translate it He offered it on the Altar yet v. 13. where there is the same phrase they expresly translate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he laid the Burnt-offering upon the Altar and again v. 17. in the same manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. he laid it upon the Altar besides the burnt-sacrifice of the morning For common fire it is supposed was no longer to be used when Aaron's Sacrifice began as it had been all along before But there is no certainty in this and we may as well take the words in their proper sense that Aaron burnt this and the following Sacrifice as Moses had done before VIII 14 21 28. until the Burnt-offering for the People came to be offered which God consumed by fire from himself and then followed those other Sacrifices mentioned v. 17 18. For all these Sacrifices for Aaron and for the People could not be laid upon the Altar at once but one after another in the order here directed and consequently this Sacrifice here mentioned was actually burnt upon the Altar to make way for those which followed it Ver. 11. Verse 11 And the flesh and the hide he burnt with fire without the camp See VIII 17. Ver. 12. Verse 12 And he slew the burnt-offering and Aaron's sons presented to him the blood c. See I. 5. Ver. 13 14. Verse 13 14. And they presented the burnt-offering unto him with the pieces thereof c. All that is contained in these two Verses is explained in the first Chapter v. 8 9. where the Law about burnt-offerings is delivered Ver. 15. Verse 15 And he brought the peoples sin-offering c. Having offered all that was necessary for himself now he became fit to make Supplication for the People And offered it for sin as the first In the same manner as he offered the foregoing Sin-offering for himself v. 8 c. Ver. 16. Verse 16 And he brought the burnt-offering Here being no express mention of burning it some from thence conclude that this was the Offering which alone was consumed by fire from the LORD See v. 24. And offered it according to the manner Laid it upon the Altar as Moses had directed in the first Chapter of this Book Ver. 17. And he brought the meat-offering c. Which attended upon burnt-Burnt-offerings XV Numb 2 3 4 c. Beside the burnt-offering of the morning This shows that Aaron began his Priestly Function with the Morning Sacrifice which preceded all other and was never omitted for the sake of any other Sacrifice that was to follow it and it had always a Meat-offering waiting upon it XXIX Exod. 39 40. Ver. 18 19. Verse 18 19. He slew also the Bullock and the Ram for a sacrifice of peace-offerings These two Verses are explained in the third Chapter which treats of such kind of Offerings Ver. 20. Verse 20 And he put the fat upon the beasts c. That it might by elevation and waving be presented unto the LORD and then burnt upon the Altar See VII 30. Ver. 21. Verse 21 And the breasts and the right shoulder Aaron waved for a wave-offering before the LORD The Fat being burnt upon the Altar as God's portion these were the portion of the Priests who feasted upon God's Meat for they were solemnly presented unto him before they had them See VII 34. Ver. 22. Verse 22 And Aaron lifted up his hands towards the people Imploring the Divine Blessing upon the People which he afterwards pronounced At this day they that are of the Family of Aaron going up the steps which lead to the place where the Book of the Law is kept lift up their hands as high as their heads and pronounce a Blessing in their Synagogues upon the Assembly And they say the ancient Custom was which is still observed not only to lift up and spread their hands but then to joyn them together by the thumbs and the two fore-fingers dividing the other from them in that Figure which is represented by an eminently learned Person J. Wagenseil in his Commentary upon Sota cap. 7. p. 672. and 1132. And blessed them We read of no order for this but natural Reason taught them from the beginning that the Priestly Office consisted in praying
ordered to be IV. 12 21. that is if their Blood was carried into the Holy Place then nothing of them might be eaten VI. 30. But otherwise their Flesh was to be eaten in the Court of the Tabernacle as is expresly commanded VI. 26. This distinction they either did not well observe when it was delivered or being oppressed with sorrow for the loss of Nadab and Abihu they did not think it fit to feast at this time upon the Flesh of this Offering For so Aaron excuses this Fact v. 19. And he was angry with Eleazar and Ithamar He saith nothing to Aaron either because he was loth to add to his Grief or because it was the business of his Sons to look after this Sacrifice and to see that the Flesh of it was disposed of according to God's orders The sons of Aaron which were left alive Who by the punishment upon their Brethren should have learnt greater caution in their Ministry Ver. 17. Verse 17 Wherefore have ye not eaten the sin-offering in the holy place That is obeyed the Commandment which I gave you VI. 26. Seeing it is most holy VI. 25. And God hath given it you VI. 29. To bear the iniquity of the Congregation to make atonement for them before the LORD God bestowed upon the Priests this Reward of their Service that they might be the more willing to take upon them the Peoples Sins and to make an Expiation carefully for them And indeed the very eating of the Peoples Sin-offering argued the Sins of the People were in some sort laid upon the Priests to be taken away by them Which being done they had reason to rejoyce also in a Feast upon this Sacrifice which God had been pleased to accept for the taking away of the Sins of the People From whence the Sacrifice of Christ may be explained who is said to bear our iniquity as the Priest is said here to do all our Sins being laid on him who took upon him to make an Expiation for them by the Sacrifice of himself For the Priest here by eating of the Sin-offering receiving the Guilt upon himself may well be thought to prefigure one who should be both Priest and Sacrifice for Sin which was accomplished in Christ Ver. 18. Verse 18 Behold Observe what I say to you The blood of it was not brought in within the holy place It was none of those Sacrifices which I commanded you to burn intirely but required you to eat of it VI. 26 30. Ye should indeed have eaten it in the holy place as I commanded For as there was a peremptory Law forbidding the Priests to eat the Flesh of any Sacrifice whose Blood was brought into the Holy Place to make atonement with it so there was as peremptory a Law that they should eat the Flesh of those Sacrifices for Sin whose Blood was not brought in thither Ver. 19. Verse 19 And Aaron said unto Moses Though Moses questioned only Eleazar and Ithamar yet Aaron makes the answer they not being able perhaps to give an account of what they had done though sensible of their mistake Behold this day have they offered their sin-offering and their burnt-offering before the LORD His Apology for them seems to be this that they had not wholly violated God's Command but performed the Substance of it though they had failed in one Circumstance For they had not only offered the Sin-offering for the People for that is meant by their Sin-offering but also their Burnt-offering IX 15 16. and that before the LORD in the place where he ordered them to be offered In all this Aaron was the principal Minister but they assisted him For it is expresly said They presented unto him the Blood of the peace-Peace-offerings which at the same time were also offered and they put the fat upon the breasts when he burnt the fat upon the Altar IX 18 20. And such things have befallen me After this was done followed the death of Nadab and Abihu who went in to burn Incense which struck him into such a Consternation and made him so exceeding sad that he was not fit to feast with Eleazar and Ithamar upon the Sacrifice and so suffered them to burn it And if I had eaten the sin-offering to day should it have been accepted in the sight of the LORD Would God have been pleased with me if in such Sadness and Sorrow I had eaten of the Sacrifice This is the reason whereby he justifies the omission of which his Sons were accused in not eating the Sin-offering in the Holy Place The blame of which he takes upon himself for to have eaten it with a sad Countenance and a heavy Heart he thought would have been to pollute it And therefore he chose to forbear it and to give it wholly to God by burning the Flesh of it as he had done the Fat which he hoped would be more acceptable than to eat it in grief And to eat it without grief and sorrow was impossible for though they had not been so dutiful to him as they ought to have been yet he could not extinguish the Affection of a Father towards them nor suddenly cease to mourn inwardly for their untimely death From this place Maimonides gathers there was but one day of Mourning due to the dead viz. the first the rest were added by the Constitution of the Elders Ver. 20. Verse 20 And when Moses heard that he was content He was either satisfied with his reason and thought he had done well for Nature seems to have directed what was afterwards enjoyned that they should rejoyce in their Feasts XII Deut. 7 c. and not eat holy things in their mourning XXVI 14. or he would not further charge him with a Fault for which there was so fair an Excuse For where there is no wilful Contempt but rather a Respect intended in any Action all good Men are inclined to make a favourable Construction of it and grant it an Indulgence though there be some Error in it CHAP. XI MOSES having mentioned in his preceding Discourse about Sacrifices several sorts of Uncleanness V. 2 3. and in the foregoing Chapter X. 10. commanded the Priests to keep themselves sober that they might at all times be able to distinguish between clean and unclean takes an occasion from thence to give an account of that matter For otherwise that which we read Chapter XVI would here have most naturally followed as appears from the 11th Verse of it being about the principal Sacrifice whereby all manner of Uncleanness was to be expiated which he now inserts in the midst of those things that belong to that head For first he treats in this Chapter of unclean Meats and in the XII XIII XIV XVth of unclean Persons Garments and Habitations And then after he hath directed how to make the great Atonement for the whole Nation and some other things he returns in the latter end of the XVIIth Chapter to speak of some forbidden Food and Chapter XVIIIth of unclean
or any Metal provided one of them was not bigger than the other nor one of Gold the other of Silver c. but both every way equal as the Goats were to be Upon one of these Lots was written the name of the Goat which was for the LORD and on the other that which was for Azazel And then the Priest shaking the Urn and putting in both his hands as it there follows in Joma cap. 4. took up a Lot in each And if he brought up God's Lot in his right hand the Sagan who stood there said My Lord lift up thy right hand If in his left hand the Head of the Fathers said Lift up thy left hand And so the Priest let the right hand Lot fall upon the Goat that stood on the right hand and his left hand lot upon the other One lot for the LORD To be offered unto the LORD at the Altar The other lot for the scape-goat Or as it is in the Hebrew for Azazel as some have anciently translated it Now why a Goat was offered in Sacrifice and another Goat let go free laden with their sins rather than any other Creature may be understood perhaps from the inclination of the Heathen World in those days when they worshipped Daemons in the form of a Goat The Egyptians were famous for this and the Israelites themselves it appears from the XVIIth Chapter of this Book v. 7. were prone to offer Sacrifices le Seirim which signifies Daemons in that form And therefore to take them off from such Idolatrous Practises God ordained these Creatures themselves to be sacrificed and slain to whom they had offered Sacrifice And the young ones he appointed for this purpose for so Seirim signifies which the Egyptians most of all honoured and abhorred to offer or kill So Juvenal Nefas illic foetum jugulare Capellae Satyr XV. V. II. Now from hence perhaps it was that some fancied Azazel signified the Devil as R. Menachem and R. Eliezer among the Jews Julian among the Heathen and some great Men lately among us Who conceive that as the other Goat was offered to God at the Altar so this was sent among the Daemons which delight to frequent desert places and there appeared often in the shape of this Creature But this will not agree with the Hebrew Text which says this Goat was for Azazel as the other was for the LORD Now none sure will be so prophane as to imagine that both these Goats being set before the LORD and presented to him as equally Consecrated to him he would then order one of them to be for himself and the other for the Devil We must therefore be content with our own Translation which derives the word Azazel from Ez a Goat and azal to go away and fitly calls it the Scape-goat So Paulus Fagius and a great many others against which I see nothing objected but that Ez signifies a she Goat not a he Which made Bochartus fetch this word from the Arabick in which Language Azala signifies to remove or to separate And this agrees well enough with the name of this Goat according as the ancient Translators understood it some of which as Symmachus render it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Goat going away others as Aquila 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Goat let loose and the LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In which they had no thought of the notion of this word among the Greeks who called those Daemons by this name who were esteemed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as J. Pollux speaks averters of evil things from them But simply meant as Theodoret interprets it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Goat sent away into the Wilderness And so St. Hierom expounds it Hircus emissarius which agrees with the notion which Bochartus puts upon the word out of the Arabick Tongue This Goat being sent away into remote places there to remain separate from the Flock to which he belong'd and that upon a Mountain as the Jews fancy in the Wilderness of Sinai which from this Goat was called Azazel But I see no ground for this Ver. 9. Verse 9 And Aaron shall bring the Goat upon which the LORDS lot fell In the Hebrew the word is went up For he first took it up out of the Urn and then let it fall upon the Goat And offer him for a sin-sin-offering Devote him to God to be a Sacrifice for their Sins beseeching him to accept of this Sacrifice for that end So the word offer I observe signifies v. 6. order being given afterwards for the killing of the Goat v. 15. Ver. 10. Verse 10 But the Goat on which the lot fell to be the Scape-goat shall be presented alive before the LORD This shows that the Scape-goat was equally consecrated and devoted to God as the other was though not to be killed but sent away alive after the other had been offered in Sacrifice To make an atonement with him For this was a Sin-offering though not slain no less than the other as appears from v. 5. which shows these two Goats made but one Sin-offering Which was partly slain at the Altar and partly let go as it here follows to run whether he would the more perfectly to represent the taking away of their Sins and removing their iniquity as the Prophet speaks III Zach. 9. by vertue of this Offering for them Some indeed have thought that this Goat was not sacrificed but only presented alive before God and so let go lest it should be thought God could not forgive their Sins unless he was appeased by some slain Beast which imagination was destroyed by letting this Sin-offering be left alive at full liberty to run quite away But I can see no ground for such a Construction because these were not two but one Sin-offering as I said before which being slain in part established that opinion in them of the impossibility of obtaining reconciliation without a bloody Sacrifice Certain it is that the whole Law supposes this that without shedding of blood is no remission as the Apostle observes IX Hebr. 22. And therefore it will be more agreeable to the Holy Scriptures if we think as some do That the first Goat represented our LORD in his Sufferings and this other in his Resurrection whereby he was freed from the Bands of Death both his Death and his Resurrection being for our Deliverance as the Apostle shows IV Rom. ult And let him go free Whether he pleased For so the Hebrew word Schalac send him away or dismiss him signifies in Scripture intire liberty such as God demanded for the Israelites from Pharaoh IV Exod. 23. V. 1. For a Scape-goat Into remote places Into the Wilderness In token their sins were quite carried away to be found no more for the Goat was not meerly sent into the Wilderness but into the most desert places of it as appears from v. 22. Ver. 11. Verse 11 And Aaron shall bring the Bullock of the sin-offering
A COMMENTARY UPON THE Third Book of MOSES CALLED LEVITICUS BY The Right Reverend Father in GOD SYMON Lord Bishop of ELY LONDON Printed for Ri. Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard MDCXCVIII A COMMENTARY UPON LEVITICUS THE Third Book of MOSES CALLED LEVITICUS CHAP. I. THE Greeks and Latins give it this Name of LEVITICUS not because it Treats of the Ministry of the Levites properly so called of which the Book of NUMBERS gives a fuller account than this Book doth but because it contains the Laws about the Religion of the Jews consisting principally in various Sacrifices the charge of which was committed to Aaron the LEVITE as he is called IV Exod. 14. and to his Sons who alone had the Office of Priesthood in the Tribe of Levi Which the Apostle therefore calls a Levitical Priesthood VII Hebr. 11. Verse 1. Verse 1 And the LORD called unto Moses That is bad him draw near and not be afraid because of the Glory of that Light which was in the Tabernacle XL Exod. 35. For this is a word of love as the Hebrew Doctors speak who observe that God is not said to call the Prophets of the Gentiles but we only read that God jikar met Balaam not jikra called to him as he did here to Moses Who as Procopius Gazaeus hath well observed upon this word appointed no Service of God in his House which he had lately erected without his order whereas the Worship performed in the honour of Daemons was without any Authority from him Nay there were Magical Operations in it and Invocation of Daemons and certain tacit Obligations which their Priests contracted with them For which he produces Porphyry as a Witness And spake unto him but of the Tabernacle Hitherto he had spoken to him out of Heaven or out of the Cloud but now out of his own House Into which it is not here said he bad him come as he did afterwards when the Glory of the LORD dwelt only in the inner part of the House over the Ark but he stood it is likely without the Door of the Tabernacle till the Sacrifices were appointed as it here follows and the High Priest entred into it with the Blood of Expiation I can find no time in which this can so probably be supposed to have been done as immediately after the Consecration of the Tabernacle as soon as the Glory of the LORD entred into it And so I find Hesychius understood it who observing this Book to begin with the word And which is a Conjunction used to joyn what follows with that which goes before thence concludes that the beginning of this Book is knit to the conclusion of the last and consequently what is here related was spoken to Moses on the same day he had set up the Tabernacle and the Glory of the LORD filled it When Moses might well think as the Hierusalem Targum explains it that if Mount Sinai was so exalted by the Divine Presence there for a short space that it was not safe for him to approach it much less come up into it till God commanded him he had much more reason not to go into the Tabernacle which was sanctified to be God's dwelling place for ever till God called to him by a Voice from his Presence nay he durst not so much as come near the Door where I suppose he now stood without a particular Direction from the Divine Majesty Ver. 2. Verse 2 Speak unto the Children of Israel and say unto them The Tabernacle being erected it was fit in the next place to appoint the Service that should be performed in it which consisted in such Sacrifices as are here mentioned in the beginning of this Book There could not be a more Natural order in setting down the Laws delivered by Moses than this which is here observed If any man of you bring It is the Observation of Kimchi that in the very beginning of the Laws about Sacrifices God doth not require them to offer any but only supposes they would having been long accustomed to it as all the World then was To this he applys the words of Jeremiah VII 21. and takes it for an Indication that otherwise God would not have given so many Laws concerning Sacrifices but only in compliance with the usage of the World which could not then have been quite broken without the hazard of a Revolt from him And therefore they are directed to the right Object the Eternal God and limited to such things as were most agreeable to Humane Nature An offering unto the LORD The Hebrew word Korban which we translate an Offering and the Greeks translate a Gift is larger than Zebach which we translate a Sacrifice For as Abarbinel observes in his Preface to this Book though every Sacrifice was an Offering yet every Offering was not a Sacrifice A Sacrifice being an Offering that was slain but there were several Offerings of inanimate things as those mentioned in the beginning of the second Chapter of this Book which therefore were not properly Sacrifices but were accepted of God as much as the Offering of Beasts when they had nothing better to give And therefore the same Abarbinel will have the Name of Korban to be given to these Offerings because thereby Men approached to God For it is derived from a word which signifies to draw near from whence he thinks those words in Deuteronomy IV. 7. What Nation is there that hath God so nigh unto them c. Ye shall bring He speaks in the Plural Number say some of the Hebrew Doctors who have accurately considered these things to show that two Men might joyn together to offer one thing Your offering of the Cattle I do not know what ground Maimonides had to assert in his More Nevochim Pars III. cap. 46. that the Heathen in those days had brute Beasts in great veneration and would not kill them for it is no Argument there was such a Superstition in Moses his time because there were People in the days of Maimonides as there are now who were possessed with such Opinions But he thinks God intended to destroy this false Perswasion by requiring the Jews to offer such Beasts as are here mentioned that what the Heathen thought it a great sin to kill might be offered to God and thereby Mens sins be expiated By this means saith he Mens evil Opinions which are the Diseases and Ulcers of the Mind were cured as Bodily Diseases are by their contraries Yet in the XXXII Chapter of that Book he saith God ordered Sacrifices to be offered that he might not wholly alter the Customs of Mankind who built Temples and offered Sacrifices every where taking care it may be added at the same time that they should be offered only to himself at one certain place and after such a manner as to preserve his People from all Idolatrous Rites Which if they had considered who contemned this Book of LEVITICUS as Procopius Gazaeus tells us some did
because ittreated too much of Sacrifices they would not have thought it unworthy of the Creator of the World especially if they had lookt further to the Wisdom hidden under these things which were Examples Shadows and Patterns of heavenly things as the Apostle speaks VIII Hebr. 4. IX 13. And so was the Tabernacle it self a Figure as we there read v. 9. for the time present of a greater and more perfect Tabernacle not made with hands Even of the herd and of the flock That is Bullocks Sheep and Goats For under the word tzon which we translate Flock both Sheep and Goats are comprehended And so Moses expounds himself v. 10. These were the principal Sacrifices and most acceptable to God as Abarbinel observes in the fore-named place For though Doves and Turtles were accepted when Men were not able to bring the other yet in Publick Sacrifices these Birds were never allowed but only the three sorts of four-footed Beasts before-mentioned Which were therefore chosen as he proceeds because these were the most-excellent of all-brute Greatures on several accounts and because they were not hard to be found but easily procured and therefore no wild Beasts were required to be offered because God would not impose upon his People as his words are so great a Burden as to bring him that which could not be got without some difficulty For which cause also young Pigeons and Turtles were only offered among Birds He gives other Reasons for this which seem to me very far fetcht and therefore I shall not mention them But this I may further add That as they were the most ready at hand and in common use among Men at their Tables which he should have noted as the plainest Reason of all so they had been in most ancient use among Religious People in their Sacrifices See XV Gen. 9. And it is very likely they were restrained peculiarly to these that they might not follow the Customs of the Gentiles as they would have done had they not been abridged in their liberty Now though we find in Homer mention made of Hecatombs which were a Sacrifice of an hundred Oxen and of perfect Lambs and Goats whereby Achilles hoped Apollo might be appeased and moved to cease the Plague he had sent upon the Greeks yet there was no more ancient Sacrifice among the Heathen if we may believe themselves then that of Swine Which made that Learned Roman Varro derive the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the Greek word for that Creature from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. from a Sacrifice because it was most anciently offered to their Gods there being no more delicious Food at their own Tables then Swines Flesh See Petrus Castellanus de Esu Carnium Lib. II. cap. 1. And afterwards they also sacrificed not only Harts to Diana but Horses to the Sun Wolves to Mars nay Dogs to Hecate whereby they destroyed the very Nature of Sacrifices or at least of Sacrifical Feasts in which People had communion with the Gods whom they worshipped by partaking at their Table For who could endure to eat of such Meat as Horse-flesh and the Flesh of Wolves nay Asses which were offered to Priapus Ver. 3. Verse 3 If his offering be a Burnt-sacrifice Having prescribed what sort of Creatures should be offered he first directs them about their Holocausts as the Greeks call them which were wholly burnt upon the Altar and were the most ancient Sacrifices that had been in the World They are often mentioned by the Greeks particularly by Xenophon in his Cyropaedia Lib. VIII where he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. they sacrificed whole Burnt-offerings of Oxen to Jupiter and afterwards of Horses to the Sun See Bochart L. II. Hierozoic cap. 33. P. I. Sometimes indeed the Heathen burnt only a part and reserved the rest to feast upon as he there observes But among the Jews no Man ever partaked of these Offerings For there being four sorts of Sacrifices prescribed by the Law as Abarbinel observes in his Preface to this Book cap. 2. the whole Burnt-offerings the Sin-offerings the Trespass-offerings and the Peace-offerings There was this difference made between them that of the first of these whether it was a publick or a private whole Burnt-offering no Body partaked no not the Priests themselves but it was intirely consumed except the Skin Of the second some part was burnt the rest the Priests had and were to eat it in the Court of the Tabernacle though there was one sort of Sin-offering which was wholly consumed as the Burnt-offerings were The third sort which were Trespass-offerings were only offered for private Persons some part of which as in the former were burnt upon the Altar and the rest eaten by the Priests As for the last the Peace-offering some part of such Sacrifices were burnt on the the Altar the Priest had the Breast and the right Shoulder and the remainder he that brought the Sacrifice eat with his Friends I shall add no more but that these whole Burnt-offerings seem to have been simple Acknowledgments of God the Creator of the World and Testifications that they owned him to be their LORD and continued in Covenant with him and implored his Blessing upon them And therefore with respect to the first and last of these Considerations the Gentiles were permitted to bring these Sacrifices as the Jews tell us but no other whatsoever to be offered unto God Of the herd As burnt-Burnt-offerings were the principal Sacrifices and therefore mentioned in the first place so those of Beeves were the chief of all Burnt-offerings both among the Jews and among the Gentiles Whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sacrifice Oxen became a Proverb for a magnificent Entertainment Let him offer a male These were accounted the best and therefore principally appointed And so they were among the Heathen insomuch that the Egyptians offered only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Herodotus tells us Lib. II. cap. 41. and thought it unlawful to offer Females Which shows that Moses did not conform his Laws to their Customs for he admitted the Sacrifice of Females III. 1. Nay it was particularly prescribed in some Cases XIX Numb 2. Without blemish Or perfect as the Hebrew word Tamim signifies Which word Homer expresly uses when Achilles speaks about the Sacrifices to Apollo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For to the Gods as Eustathius there observes who are most perfect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most perfect things ought to be offered The like passage a very learned Friend of mine now with God Dr. Owtram observes out of the Scholiast upon Aristophanes his Acharnenses Lib. I. de Sacrificiis cap. 9. sect 3. where more may be seen to the same purpose Now that is perfect in which there is no defect in any part and is not decayed by Age. For which reason Abarbanel observes great care is taken in the Law that this sort of Creatures were to be offered before they were three years old and the other
northward The greater Sacrifices which the Jews call the most holy things had this peculiar place assigned them where they were to be killed viz. all the Burnt-offerings whether of Bullocks Sheep or Goats and all Offerings for sin VI. 25. and all Trespass-offerings VII 2. But all the other Sacrifices which they call the lesser holy things such as the Peace-offerings of particular Men the Paschal Lamb the First-born and that which was tithed might be killed in any part of the Court where the Altar stood there being no peculiar place appointed by the Law for that purpose but only at the Entrance of the Tabernacle Yet a Peace-offering for the whole Congregation was lookt upon as belonging to the things most holy and so was slain as Maimonides tells us at the North-side of the Altar where there were certain Rings fixed to which the Head or as some say the Feet of the Beast was tied in order to its being killed But they were not perfect Rings as L'Empereur observes being rather half-segments of Rings one part of which was fastned to the Pavement and by the other the Neck of the Beast was tied to it See Codex Middoth cap. 3. sect 5. The reason of this difference seems to be only to make a distinction between these and other Sacrifices And all this is to be understood of the four-footed Beasts before-mentioned not of Birds which were sacrificed after another manner as appears from v. 15. And the Priests shall sprinkle his blood round about upon the Altar See v. 5. and VII 2. Ver. 12. Verse 12 And he shall cut it into his pieces with his head and his fat c. This Verse hath been sufficiently explained v. 5 6 8. Ver. 13. Verse 13 And he shall wash the inwards and the legs c. See v. 9. where this also is explained It is a burnt-sacrifice an offering made by fire of a sweet savour unto the LORD As much as to say this is as acceptable to the LORD as the Sacrifice of a Bullock when offered with a pious Mind Ver. 14. Verse 14 And if the burnt-sacrifice for his offering to the LORD be of fowls It is well observed by Maimonides in his More Nevochim P. III. cap. 46. that when a Man was not able to go to the charge of a Sheep or a Goat much less of a Bullock God was so merciful as to accept of a Bird only he prescribes of what sort they should be Nay he that was not able to be at this expence was accepted if he offered Bread however prepared whether in an Oven or a Pan according to the custom of those Times And he to whom this was too great a Burden might worship God by bringing only fine Flour as will appear in the next Chapter Then he shall bring his offering of Turtle-doves or of young Pigeons The same Author observes that there was a vast plenty of these Birds in the Land of Canaan and consequently they were so cheap that it would put the poorer sort to no great charge to bring this Oblation They were also very anciently sacrificed XV Gen. 9. and of a gentle nature as Procopius and others observe And Pigeons being best when they are young and Turtles when full grown accordingly they are appointed to bring them when they were most esteemed These are but seldom mentioned in the Sacrifices among the Gentiles who offered Cocks to Aesculapius and Geese to Isis as we read in several of their Authors Ver. 15. Verse 15 And the Priest shall bring it unto the Altar and wring off his head Pinch it off with his Nail as the Jews say at one of the Corners or Horns of the Altar viz. the whole Burnt-offering at the Southeast Corner and the Sin-offering at the North-west as Maimonides saith in his Treatise called Korbanoth cap. 5. But their Heads were so to be wrung or pinched as not to be separated quite from the Body but to be left still hanging to it For so it is ordered in that Sacrifice mentioned V. 8. and therefore they suppose it was so in all And the blood thereof shall be wrung out at the sides of the Altar This is the reason that the Priest alone might kill the Bird though others might kill the Beasts See v. 5. because the sprinkling of the Blood which none might do but the Priest was immediately conjunct with the wringing off its Head Ver. 16. Verse 16 And he shall pluck away his Crop Or the Stomach that the Sacrifice might be clean and free from all filth With his feathers Which were no more to be offered than the Skin of the Beasts v. 6. And cast it besides the Altar on the east part As far as might be from the most Holy Place which was in the West By the place of the ashes See IV. 12. Ver. 17. Verse 17 And he shall cleave it with the wings thereof but shall not divide it asunder The Wings were to be so cloven as not to be quite separated from the Body but still to remain hanging to it and so Salt being sprinkled upon the whole Body it was thrown into the fire So Maimonides observes in the forenamed Treatise where he takes notice also that it was otherwise in Fowls offered for sin of which nothing but the Blood belonged to the Altar the Flesh of them being eaten by the Priests and their Sons Whence it was that no Sin-offering of Birds was accepted unless it were accompanied with an whole Burnt-offering that the Altar might not be without a Feast when they that ministred there were entertained Thus it is required in several Cases mentioned V. 7. XII 6 8. XIV 22. XV. 15 30. and VI Numb 11. The same Maimonides likewise observes that this Sacrifice of Birds was one of the most difficult Works in the Sanctuary whereby the Mind of the Priest was kept as intent upon the poorest Sacrifice as upon the most splendid And the Priest shall burn it upon the Altar upon the wood that is upon the fire This was in part said before but here repeated more distinctly to show there was no difference to be made between the Sacrifices of the meanest and of the greatest It is a burnt-sacrifice an offering made by fire of a sweet savour unto the LORD The same is said of this as of all other Holocausts v. 9 15. to show that whether the Oblation was of the greater Animals or the less or only of Birds it made no difference in its acceptance with God Who graciously ordered these various sorts of Offerings that the Poor as well as the Rich might be capable to express their Devotion to him and be confident to find favour with him CHAP. II. Ver. 1. Verse 1 AND when any will offer a Meat-offering unto the LORD Here is a merciful provision for those who were neither able to offer Beasts of any sort nor Birds whom God ordered to bring Meal as was observed before on the first Chapter v. 14. which was called
Neither mixed with Bread nor alone by themselves For Honey was a kind of Leaven and it is certain was used by the Heathen in their Religious Rites As appears not only from Maimonides who tells us in the place forenamed that they chose sweet things for their offerings and anointed their Sacrifices with Honey but from a great number of other Authors who make mention of it Particularly Plato who saith in his VI de Legibus that anciently Men did not Sacrifice living Creatures but only fine Flour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Fruits moistned with Honey And so Phylarchus tells us in Athenaeus his Deipnos L. XV. that the Greeks sacrificed Honey to the Sun which was the great God among the Gentiles but poured no Wine upon his Altars Which Polemon in Suidas calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sober Sacrifice because there was no Wine in it but Honey and Water mixed together Nay there was scarce any God among the Heathen to whom Honey was not offered as Bochartus hath shown at large in his Hierozoicon P. II. L. IV. c. 12. But one Testimony may serve for all which is from Pausanias in his Eliaca where having reckoned up at least fifty Altars in the Temple of Jupiter Olympius unto several Deities and some of them common to them all he saith They sacrificed upon every one of them once a Month after an ancient manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Frankincense and Wheat mingled with Honey Which being so common and ancient a thing among the Gentiles in their Idolatrous Worship was the reason it is likely that God forbad it to be used in his Sacrifices And under the name of Honey the Jews think Figs and Dates and all other sweet Fruits are comprehended For the famous Composition among the Egyptians called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was burnt every day Morning and Evening on their Altars consisted of such things as well as of Myrrh Calamus and Cardamum So Plutarch tells us in his Book de Iside Osir and mentions Honey in the first place with Wine and Raisins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Ver. 12. Verse 12 As for the oblation of the first-fruits ye shall offer them unto the LORD but they shall not be burnt on the Altar for a sweet savour There were several sorts of First-fruits as I observed XXIII Exod. 19. That which is here spoken of was of the Corn unground only a little parcht at the fire which was to be presented unto God but not burnt on the Altar because they belong'd to the Priests Ver. 13. Verse 13 And every oblation of thy meat-offering shalt thou season with salt All the fore-named Mincha's which were Korbans as they are often here called were to be thus seasoned because Salt was a thing never wanting at any Table and all Meat is unsavoury without it Neither shalt thou suffer the salt of the Covenant of thy God to be lacking from thy meat-offerings It is called the Salt of the Covenant of God as some think because required by this Law which they covenanted with God to observe as much as to offer Sacrifices which were not acceptable without Salt as appears from the Repetition of it three times in this one Verse But there is a plainer reason than this which is That the Sacrifices being God's Feasts and they that did partake of them being his Guests who did in a manner eat and drink with him at his Table the Salt that was cast upon all Sacrifices as appears by the words following is called the Salt of the Covenant to signifie that as Men were wont to make Covenants by eating and drinking together where Salt is never wanting at their Tables but a necessary Appendix at every Feast so God by these Sacrifices and the Feasts upon them did ratifie and confirm his Covenant with those that did partake of them For Salt as is commonly observed being a constant concomitant of all Feasts and Covenants being made by eating and drinking at the same Table where Salt was ever used thence Salt it self was counted by the Ancients to be the Symbol of Friendship and proverbially used among the Greeks to express it By which other places may be explained about which some have bestowed vain labour XVIII Numb 19. 2 Chron. XIII 5. where the same words are used but inverted it being called a Covenant of Salt instead of the Salt of the Covenant because Covenants as I said were established by eating together where Salt is never wanting With all thine Offerings thou shalt offer salt Not only with the Minchas or Meat-offerings mentioned in this Chapter but with all other Sacrifices whatsoever Which is so solemnly enjoyned as Maimonides says in the place before-named because the Heathen did not use any Salt in their Sacrifices Which is not unreasonable to think since Honey with which Salt doth not well agree was in such constant use among them And therefore saith he God prohibited us to offer Leaven or Honey and commanded us with great seriousness to use Salt in all our Sacrifices That is as R. Levi of Barcelona explains it Praecept CXVI the Flesh of all Sacrifices was to be salted and the Meal of all Minchas For which he gives these two Reasons because nothing is grateful to the Palate without Salt which also preserves things from Corruption as the Sacrifices did their Souls from perishing Abarbanel saith the same And therefore whatsoever the Custom might be in ancient time among the Heathen in after Ages they learnt from Moses to use it in all their Sacrifices As appears from Pliny and Ovid and many other Authors the first of which says That Salt was so necessary that no Sacrifices were offered sine mola Salsa which every one knows the Greeks called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And among the Jews this Salt was not brought by him that offered the Sacrifice but was provided at the Publick Charge there being a Chamber in the Court of the Temple as we read in Middoth cap. 5. sect 2. called The Chamber of Salt Which was one of the three Rooms on the North-side of the Court as there were three other on the South-side for other uses where the Flesh of the Sacrifices were powdered as the Mincha's were seasoned at the very Altar And this was so necessary that though a Sacrifice was not lookt upon as null if the Priest neglected to salt it yet the want of it in the Mincha's as the Hebrew Doctors say made them void because it is here so expresly required in this Verse Thou shalt not suffer the Salt of the Covenant of thy God to be lacking in thy Meat-offering And whosoever offered any Sacrifice without Salt or with Honey or Leaven was beaten as Mr. Selden observes L. II. de Synedr cap. 13. Ver. 14. Verse 14 And if thou offer a Meat-offering of thy first-fruits unto the LORD thou shalt offer for thy Meat-offering c. This is very
different from the Oblation of First-fruits mentioned v. 12. For there they are called Resith which signifies the First-fruits at Harvest time but here Bichurim which properly imports the first ripe fruits before the rest were ready And therefore the manner of their Oblation was different from the former which follows in the Conclusion of this Verse And first he describes what he means by the First-fruits which he calls Abib i. e. full Ears of Corn but as yet green and moist which he saith therefore in the next place must be dried by the fire and then bruised and beaten in a Mortar or with a Mill and they were to be brought out of the richest or fattest of their Fields for so the last words seem to signifie Geresh Carmel which we translate Corn beaten out of full Ears for Carmel sometimes signifies a fruitful Field XXXII Isa 15. and therefore may very well be thought in this place to import the largest Ears of tender Corn. And the intention of its Contusion seems to have been that it might be reduced into Flour as it might easily be after it had been dried by the fire And therefore differed from that Meat-offering mentioned v. 1. only in this that the former was Flour of old Corn this of new and that was fine Flour sifted from the Bran this had nothing taken out of it but remained as it came from the Mortar or the Mill. And so the LXX seem to have understood it There are those indeed who think it was only thrashed out of the Husk and so offered and fancy also that from this word Geresh the Goddess called Ceres had her Name among the Gentiles Which last Conceit is the stranger since they endeavour to have it thought that the Jews derived this Custom of offering First-fruits from the Gentiles and not the Gentiles from the Jews Whereas the Gentiles had no such Custom that I can find as this to offer the First-fruits of Green Corn but only the First-fruits of their Harvest which they called Novas fruges of which the Romans thought it unlawful to taste antequam Sacerdotes primitias libassent before the Priests had offered the First-fruits as Pliny tells us Lib. XVIII cap. 2. and Censorinus saith the same cap. 1. de Die Natali Or if they did offer any First-fruits before Corn was ripe they boiled them in a Pot but did not rost them in the fire as is here directed For so Hesychius seems to say that in the Feast called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was in the Month that Answers to our April they offered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the First-fruits that appeared out of the Ground which they carried about i. e. in Pots as other Authors tell us And Hesychius himself saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signified a Pot full of Sacred Decoction Ver. 15. Verse 15 And thou shalt put oil upon it c. See v. 1. And the Priest shall burn the memorial of it part of the beaten corn thereof and part of the oil and all the frankincense All the rest that was not burnt was the Priests portion except the Frankincense which is here ordered to be intirely offered to God See v. 2. and made this and such like Offerings be called an Offering of a sweet savour unto the LORD v. 2.9 12. It is an offering made by fire unto the LORD See upon v. 9. CHAP. III. Ver. 1. Verse 1 AND if his oblation be a sacrifice of peace-offering Having given orders about whole burnt-Burnt-offerings in the first Chapter and Meat-offerings which had something of that Nature in them in the second he proceeds to Peace-offerings which in the Hebrew are called Schelamim from the word Schalam either as it signifies Retribution or Peace and Concord They that take it in the first sence think the reason of the name to be from this That God the Offerer and the Priest had each of them their portion assigned to them of this Sacrifice And they that follow the second sence do not much differ when they say That these Sacrifices were Symbols of Friendship between God and the Priests and those that brought them for all these feasted at a Common Table as R. Levi ben Gersom expresses it For part being offered on the Altar and the Priest having taken his share the rest was given to him that offered the Sacrifice So that it was called a Peace-offering saith Abarbanel in his Preface to this Book because it made Peace or rather declared Peace between the Altar the Priest and the Owner But they seem to me to have given the best account of this who because Peace in their Language signifies Prosperity and Happiness think these were called Peace-offerings because they were principally thankful Acknowledgments of Mercies received from God's Bounty For there being three sorts of them mentioned VII 15 16. that of Thanksgiving is the first called Totheh Acknowledgment of some Benefit received The Gentiles called such Sacrifices 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as appears from many places of Dionys Halicarn L. VI. L. VIII where there are these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plutarch calls them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 particularly in the Life of Agesilaus where he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a perfect Description of such Sacrifices as are here appointed with part of which they entertain'd their Friends They are also called by those Writers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 especially when they had respect to any great Danger they had escaped for which they offered these thankful Acknowledgments The LXX calls such Sacrifices 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If he offer it of the herd whether it be a male or female A whole Burnt-offering was to be only of a Male for being wholly Gods and offered purely for his Honour it was to be of the very best I. 3. But Peace-offerings being also for the profit of him that offered them who had the greatest share of them it was at his liberty whether he would offer a Male or a Female Directly contrary to the Egyptian Customs if they were the same now that they were in the time of Herodotus who saith expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was not lawful among them to sacrifice Females L. II. cap. 41. He shall offer it without blemish c. See I. 3. Ver. 2. Verse 2 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of his offering The Man who brought the Offering was to lay his hand upon the Head of it as was ordered in the whole Burnt-offering and Sin-offering See Ch. I. v. 4. It might not be done by a Deputy unless he was Heir to one that had vowed this Sacrifice and died before he had performed it in which case the Heir was to do what the Man himself should have done if he had been alive as Maimonides observes In this Sacrifice laying on of hands seems to have been done not only with Prayer to God that he would accept the Oblation which the Jews say always accompanied this
Action but with acknowledgment of those Mercies which were the occasion of it So Conradus Pellicanus well glosses upon I. 4. which may be best applied to the use of this Rite in Peace-offerings Laying on of Hands signifies Devotion and Faith with acknowledgment of the Divine Benefits for which we cannot offer any thing of our own but rather return and restore to him what we have received that we may understand giving of Thanks to be the greatest of our Sacrifices And kill it See ch I. v. 5. At the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation These being the lesser holy things as the Jews call them were not offered as the whole Burnt-offerings and Sin-offerings were on the North-side of the Altar See ch I. v. 11. but any where else near to the Entrance of the Tabernacle which was in the East where the others were thrown out and therefore a less holy place Only in laying on of hands every Man was bound wheresoever the Sacrifice was killed to turn his Face Westward toward the Sanctuary because then as I said he made certain Prayers and Acknowledgments to the Divine Majesty which was always to be done in that posture And Aarons sons the Priests shall sprinkle the blood upon the Altar round about See ch I. v. 5. Ver. 3. Verse 3 And he shall offer One of the Priests then in waiting at the Altar Of the sacrifice of the peace-offerings c. After the Sacrifice was flayed and cut up as is directed I. 6. The fat that covereth the inwards That is the Omentum as the Latins call it and hath much fat in it See XXIX Exod. 13. And all the fat that is upon the inwards All the Fat which adheres to the Mesentery and other Entrails Ver. 4. Verse 4 And the two kidneys and the fat that is on them The Kidneys are noted by Aristotle to have more Fat about them than any of the other Bowels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. III. de Animal cap. 9. Being so covered with it that in dissecting of a Body the Kidneys at first sight are not to be perceived as Anatomists observe particularly our own Country-man Dr. Highmore Which is by the flanks The Hebrew word Cesilim signifies the Loyns as Bochart hath demonstrated in his Hierozoicon P. I. L. II. c. 45. which have collops of fat upon them as Eliphaz speaks XV Job 27. and thence are easily inflamed XXXVIII Psal 7. And the caul above the liver The Hebrew word jothereth signifies the greatest Lobe of the Liver See XXIX Exod. 13. It shall he take away Separate from the rest of the Flesh to be offered on the Altar For all the Fat here mentioned was God's portion of the Sacrifice the Priest had the Breast and the right Shoulder and he that brought the Offering had the rest as will appear more fully VII 15 c. 31. 32 c. Ver. 5. Verse 5 And Aarons sons Some of those that Minister that day Shall burn it on the Altar upon the burnt-sacrifice By the Burnt-sacrifice seems here to be meant the daily Sacrifice which was burnt every Morning after which this was to be offered but not before it Which is upon the wood that is on the fire The same wood upon which the Burnt-sacrifice had been offered would serve to burn this Fat Which being intirely consumed as the Holocausts were it is called in the following words an offering made by fire of a sweet savour unto the LORD See ch 1. v. 9. That is God was pleased graciously to accept of their pious Acknowledgments the Offerings of these Inwards being as if he that brought them had said I will pour out my Soul unto the LORD in Thanks and Praise for the Benefits he had received So Abarbanel explains it in his Preface to this Book Ver. 6. Verse 6 And if his offering c. be of the flock i.e. Of Sheep or Goats which are both comprehended under the word Flock as was noted before ch 1. v. 2. Male or Female See v. 1. Where I observed a difference between these Sacrifices and whole Burnt-offerings in this respect that either Male or Female were accepted for Peace-offerings but Male alone for the other To which may be added that Birds were allowed for whole Burnt-offerings I. 14 15 c. but not for Peace-offerings which were only of the Herd or Flock i. e. of Bullocks Sheep or Goats The reason seems to be plain because Peace-offerings being to be divided between God the Priest and him that brought them the portion of each would have been so small that it would have made the Feast upon it so very meagre and jejune that it would have been contemptible He shall offer it without blemish It was at his choice whether he would bring it from the Herd or the Flock but in its kind it was to be perfect See chap. I. 3 9. Ver. 7. Verse 7 If he offer a lamb for his offering Though a Bird was not accepted for a Peace-offering yet a Lamb was though not of such value as a fat Sheep or a Goat Then shall he offer it before the LORD This seems to be meant of the Man's presenting it to be offered at the Altar Ver. 8. Verse 8 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of his offering c. This whole Verse is only a direction to do with a Peace-offering of a Lamb or Sheep as they were to do with that of a Bullock v. 2. Ver. 9. Verse 9 And he shall offer of the Sacrifice of the Peace-offering an offering made by fire unto the LORD As was directed in the Offering of a Bullock v. 3. The fat thereof and the whole rump The whole Fat being to be offered as was ordered also before he enumerates the particulars because in this was more Fat than in other Sacrifices of this kind For the whole Rump of a Sheep was to be offered to God though not of a Bullock nor a Goat And the reason was because in those Countries the Tails of their Sheep are so vastly big that as Golius and others assure us the least of them weigh ten or twelve pound and some exceed forty pound weight and they are so very fat that they melt the Fat and keep it to butter their Rice and for other uses as Bochartus observes in his Hierozoicon P. I. L. II. cap. 45. It shall he take off hard by the back-bone The Hebrew word Atzah which we translate the Back-bone denotes that part which is next to the Tail or Rump and therefore must signifie that which Galen calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which is a Bone at the extremity of the broad Bone called Os Sacrum confisting of three Cartalaginous parts as he describes it And the fat that covereth the inwards and all the fat that is upon the inwards See v. 3. Ver. 10. Verse 10 And the two kidneys and the fat that is upon them c. This Verse is explained above v. 4. Ver. 11. Verse 11 And the
Priest shall burn it upon the Altar As he did the Fat of the Bullock v. 5. It is the food of the offering made by fire unto the LORD That which was offered upon the Altar was accounted God's Mess as appears from I Malachai 12. where the Altar is called his Table and the Sacrifice upon it his Meat as here it is called his Bread or Food To represent in a lively manner to them that God dwelt and as we say kept House among them and that they who partaked of these Sacrifices feasted with him upon his Provision See upon XXV Exod. 8 30. Ver. 12. Verse 12 And if his offering be a Goat c. The Law concerning this Sacrifice is the very same with the former except what is ordered about the Rump of a Sheep and this and the following Verses 13 14 15. need no farther Explication Ver. 16. Verse 16 And the Priest shall burn it upon the Altar it is the food of the offering c. See before v. 11. All the fat is the LORDS That is all the Fat before-mentioned which may more properly be translated the Suet. For that Fat which was a part of the Flesh might be eaten as appears from many places particularly XXXII Deut. 14. but not that which only lay upon it and might be separated from it which was burnt upon the Altar when they sacrificed either Bullock Sheep or Goat And when they killed any of these or other clean Creatures for their Food at home still they were to forbear to eat the Suet partly out of reverence to God whose portion it was at the Altar and partly because it was heavy and too strong a Food as Maimonides takes it More Nevochim P. III. cap. 48. And it seems therefore to have been offered upon the Altar because it was so unctuous that it would easily burn and make the Flesh also consume the sooner But from its being God's part it came thence to signifie the very best and most excellent of any kind of thing As the best of the Tithe is called the Fat of the Tithe XVIII Numb 17. and the best Corn is called the Fat of the Wheat LXXXI Psal 16. and rich and powerful Men are called the Fat upon Earth as the chief and principal part of the People XXII Psal 29. Ver. 17. Verse 17 It shall be a perpetual statute In force as long as this Law about Sacrifices shall last For your generations For their Posterity as well as them who received this Law in all succeeding Ages Throughout all your dwellings that ye eat neither fat nor blood This confirms what was said before that they might not eat such Fat as is before-mentioned at home as their ordinary Food because it is said throughout all your dwellings ye shall eat no fat And Fat being joyned with Blood is another argument that they might no more eat the Suet of Beasts that were killed at home for common use than the Blood of such Beasts From which they intirely abstained for the foregoing reasons as Maimonides observes in the Book fore-named and for another also which he mentions in the XLVIth Chapter of it Where he saith The ancient Idolaters called Zabij were wont to eat the blood of their Sacrifices because they imagined this to be the Food of their Gods with whom they thought they had such Communion by eating of their Meat that they revealed to them things to come And in this R. Moses bar Nachman concurs with him as Dr. Cudworth observes in the conclusion of his Treatise of the Right Notion of the Lord's Supper For though he saith that Blood was forbidden because it served for Expiation in which he differs from Maimonides yet he adds also that it was used superstitiously by the Heathen in their Idolatrous Worship where they partaked of the Blood with their Daemons as being their Guests and invited to eat with them at their Table And so were joyned in faederal Society with them and by this kind of Communion enabled to prophecy and foretel things to come CHAP. IV. Ver. 1. Verse 1 AND the LORD spake unto Moses saying Having directed him about whole burnt-Burnt-offerings and Meat-offerings which constantly attended some of them and Peace-offerings which supposed Men to be in a state of favour with God he now proceeds to give order about the Expiation of their Sins when they had offended him by doing contrary to his Commands which he continues to the 14th Verse of the Vth Chapter And this Law about Sin-offerings seems to have been delivered to Moses at a different time from the former being about a different matter but by a Voice speaking to him out of the Tabernacle as before ch I. 1. Ver. 2. Verse 2 Speak unto the Children of Israel saying If a soul shall sin through ignorance c. There are three Conditions expressed in this Verse of the Sin for which the following Sacrifice was admitted First It was to be committed ignorantly not wittingly and presumptuously Secondly It was for Sin against a negative Precept as the Jews call them i.e. such a Commandment as forbad something to be done So it is said here expresly Concerning things which ought not to be done As for the omission of such things as were commanded to be done they might be performed some other time when Men had better bethought themselves which was much more acceptable to God than offering Sacrifice for the omission And thirdly It was for Facts committed not for Words or Thoughts so the last words are and shall do against any of them As for the sins which Men might imprudently commit in word and in thought they were so many that the whole Flocks and Herds would not have sufficed for their Expiation nor the Altar contained all such Sacrifices The Jews add a fourth Condition That the Sacrifice here appointed was for such Facts as if they had been committed wittingly a Cereth i. e. cutting off was threatned to them by the Law which they gather from XV Numb 30. But that phrase with an high hand seems not to signifie any sort of sin but a certain manner of sinning as when a Man despised God's Commandments and brought Contempt upon the Law by his sins as a very learned Friend of mine now with God hath observed And therefore it is probable all sins committed ignorantly were expiated by the following Sacrifices save only those which are appointed to be expiated by other Sacrifices or after another manner See Dr. Owtram de Sacrificiis L. I. cap. 12. n. 2 3 4. Ver. 3. Verse 3 If the Priest that is anointed do sin And first he prescribes the Sacrifice which he who was to make the great Expiation for all the People should offer for himself viz. the High-Priest who only of all the Priests was constantly anointed at the entrance of his Office And if after he was put out of his Office he committed any such sin as is here mentioned he was to make this Offering for his Expiation
the Altar of the burnt-offering Where after the building of the Temple there were two holes one on the West-side of the Altar the other on the South as the Jews tell us in Middoth cap. 3. sect 2. by which it was conveyed into a Canal under Ground through which it ran into the Brook Kidron And there was only this difference they say about these two holes that the Blood of the Sin-offering any part of which was carried into the most holy place was poured out only into that on the West-side of the Foundation of the Altar And if we may believe the Jews the Gardiners bought this Blood of those that were the Treasurers of the Temple to inrich their Ground with it as Constantine l'Empereur there observes And while they were in the Wilderness and all the time they had only a moveable Tabernacle it is most likely there were Receptacles made under Ground with Conveyances to some distant place where it sank into the Earth or was covered with Dust as other Blood is commanded to be XVII 13. For Maimonides thinks the pouring out the Blood so that it might not remain in one place which is constantly and strictly required by the Law was in opposition to an idolatrous Custom of the old Zabij who made a collection of the Blood in a Vessel or in a little Pit about which they sat and ate the Flesh imagining their Gods feasted upon the Blood as I noted before out of Maimonides More Nevoch P. III. cap. 46. Which is at the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation For there was the place of it as hath been often observed XL Exod. 6. Ver. 8. Verse 8 And he shall take off from it all the fat of the bullock for the sin-offering c. All that follows in this and the two next Verses v. 9 10. is the same that was ordered to be done about Peace-offerings as appears from v. 10. See therefore the foregoing Chapter v. 3 4 5. Ver. 11. Verse 11 And the skin of the bullock and all his flesh with his head and with his legs and his inwards c. This Sacrifice was so laborious to work in them a greater detestation of sin which was aggravated by the quality of the Person that committed it And Nachmanides hath an observation which in some parts of it at least is very remarkable That all a Man doth being performed in Words in Works or Thoughts God commanded them when they brought an Offering for Sin that they should lay their hand on it which had respect to the Works they had done and make Confession over it which had respect to their Words and burn the Inwards and Kidneys which are the Organs of Thoughts and Desires the Legs also had a respect to a Man's hands and feet by which he doth all his work and the Blood that was sprinkled on the Altar signified his own Blood So that while a Man did all these things he was put in mind how he had sinned against God both in Soul and Body and deserved to have his Blood shed and his Body burnt unless the Mercy of the Creator had accepted a Price of Redemption for him viz. a Sacrifice whose Blood was for his Blood and its Life for his Life and the principal Members of the Sacrifice for the Members of his Body By which it appears that the best sort of Jews had a sense that the Sacrifices for Sin were offered to God in their stead as a Ransom for them And so we Christians are to understand the Sacrifice which Christ made of himself who gave himself a Ransom for us all as the Apostle speaks I Tim. 2. 6. and our LORD saith the same XX Matth. 28. X Mark 45. Such Sacrifices the Heathens themselves had which they called Lustralia from the word lustrare which signifies to expiate among the Romans and that by paying a price For the ancient Poet Ennius as our excellent Mr. Thorndike hath observed translating into Latin a Greek Tragedy called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being taken out of Homer where he speaks of Priamus ransoming of Hector's Corps from Achilles intituled it Hectoris lustra which shows this is the Latin of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ransom or redemption and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies in the New Testament to deliver by paying a ransom See his Epilogue Book II. Chapt. 27. Ver. 12. Verse 12 Even the whole bullock shall he carry forth without the Camp It was not dissected as the Peace-offerings were because no Body was to partake of any part of it being a Sacrifice for the Priests own sin And therefore it was to be carried though not by himself but some other Person to be burnt without the Camp to express the abominabless of the Sin This Rite and the carrying the Blood within the Tabernacle to be sprinkled before the LORD were used only in these two Cases of the Sin of the High-Priest and of all the People For of other sin-Sin-offerings the Priests might eat VI. 26. but of this being for himself he was not to taste at all because he was in a state of Guilt Into a clean place where the ashes are poured out On the East-part of the Tabernacle there was a place for the Ashes to be thrown into when they were taken from the Altar which afterward were carried into a clean place without the Camp And so they were carried out after the Temple was built at Jerusalem at the East-gate of the City into a Valley which lay between Jerusalem and Mount Olivet And burn him on the wood with fire Not upon an Altar but in a fire made with Wood upon the Ground to show the odiousness of the sin as Maimonides thinks For as the whole Burnt-sacrifices were burnt on the Altar because they were an Offering of sweet smelling savour unto God so this was burnt without the Camp upon the Ground to show that the odour of it was ungrateful and abominable More Nevochim P. III. cap. 46. where he also observes that the burning of the Beast intirely being the destruction of it so that nothing of it remained it signified in like manner the utter deletion of Sin so that it should be remembred no more And the Bullock being burnt without the Camp I take it to denote that the People should not suffer for the sin of the Priest which was abolished together with his Sacrifice The same Maimonides hath another observation upon the Title Zebachim that there were three places constituted for the burning of holy things The first was in the Sanctuary as every one knows the second was in the Mount of the House as they called the place round about the Court of the Sanctuary where if any blemish hapned to a Bullock or a Goat they were brought out of the Sanctuary and burnt in a place called Bira and the third was in this place of the Ashes without the City Where the ashes are poured out there shall he be burnt This is repeated
if the High-Priest were put out of his Office his Sacrifice was still the same viz. a Bullock without blemish but it was not so with the Nasi or Ruler who offered only the Sacrifice of a private Man if he lost his Office A male without blemish It was to be the best of this kind though not equal to the Sacrifice for the High-Priest and the whole Congregation See v. 28. Ver. 24. Verse 24 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the Goat Of this see v. 4. And kill it in the place where they kill the burnt-offering before the LORD Where that was see Chap. I. ver 11. Neither of the two fore-mentioned Offerings for the High-Priest or the whole Congregation are ordered to be killed here but only before the LORD v. 14 15. that is in any part of the Court but that which was proper to the Burnt-offering and the common Sin-offering as it here follows It is a sin-sin-offering And therefore was to be killed where the Burnt-offering was for so it is ordained VI. 25. that all Sin-offerings should be there slain Which doth not imply that the two former were not Sin-offerings but that they were not of the common sort as appears by the carrying of their Blood into the Sanctuary and burning their Flesh without the Camp which are not ordered either in this or in the following Sacrifices Ver. 25. Verse 25 And the Priest shall take of the blood of the sin-offering with his finger By dipping his finger into it v. 6 17. And put it upon the horns of the Altar of burnt-offering Whereas the Blood of the two former was put upon the Horns of the golden Altar in the Sanctuary v. 7 18. And shall pour out his blood at the bottom of the Altar of burnt-offering See v. 18. Ver. 26. Verse 26 And he shall burn all his fat upon the Altar c. See chap. III. 9. It is not here said what should be done with the Flesh which in the two fore-going Offerings is ordered to be burnt without the Camp v. 12 21. But in chap. VI. 26 29. and XVIII Numb 9 10. the Law of the Sin-offerings is set down to be this that the Priest and his Sons should eat it in the Sanctuary and no where else provided also that they were free from uncleanness XXII 4. And the Priest shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin By this Sacrifice his Guilt was expiated which must be understood to be the effect of the Sacrifice for the High-Priest though it be not expressed as it is in that for the whole Congregation v. 20. And it shall be forgiven him So that he should not be liable to the Punishment of cutting off as the Jews understand it who fancy such sins to which that is threatned are here spoken of See v. 1. Rather he was restored to Communion with the People of God from which he was separated while he remained in a known Guilt Ver. 27. Verse 27 And if any one of the common people sin through ignorance Commit the same Offence that a Ruler or publick Officer doth And be guilty or if his sin which he hath committed come to his knowledge See how this ought to be translated v. 22 23. Ver. 28. Verse 28 That he shall bring his offering a Kid of the Goats a female without blemish Being a common Person less was required of him than of a Prince who was to offer a Male v. 23. which in all Creatures was of greater value than a Female as Maimenides observes who reckons up three and forty offences of this sort that might be committed imprudently in his Treatise called Schegagoth in one of which viz. worshipping an Idol ignorantly the Sacrifice was the same for a private Man as for the King or the High-Priest or the Priest anointed for War But in all the other XLII a female Goat or Lamb sufficed for a private Man cap. 1. sect 4. And this Sacrifice they call stated or fixed because no Man offered more or less whether Rich or Poor Man or Woman except only those who eat holy things or entred into the Sanctuary whose Sacrifices were higher or lower as they speak And there were three things if we may believe them which though committed by Error were expiated by no Sacrifice viz. Blasphemy neglect of Circumcision and not keeping the Passover So R. Levi of Barcelona Praecept 119. Which seems to be an unreasonable Opinion since Idolatry committed ignorantly they say was comprehended within this Law Ver. 29. Verse 29 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin-offering c. This Verse and the following with the beginning of v. 31. contain nothing but what was ordered about the foregoing Sacrifice v. 24 25 26. Ver. 31. Verse 31 And the Priest shall burn it upon the Altar for a sweet savour unto the LORD This is a phrase used concerning burnt-Burnt-offerings I. 9 13. and Peace-offerings III. 5 16. but it is not said of any of the foregoing Sin-offerings that the burning of them or their Fat was for a sweet savour unto the LORD The reason of which I am not able to give unless it were to comfort the lowest sort of People with hope of God's Mercy though their Offering was mean in comparison of those offered by others Abarbanel gives this reason for it because a Sin of Ignorance being a less Fault in a common Man it was a sign of great probity in him to bring a Sacrifice for the Expiation of it But for the High-Priest or Senate or Ruler of the People to be ignorant of the Law was such a high Crime that it was no commendation to them to bring a Sacrifice for their Purgation Ver. 32. Verse 32 And if he bring a Lamb for a sin-offering c. For which reason God was pleased to accept a Lamb and that a Female of those who were not able to bring a young Kid. Ver. 33. Verse 33 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin-offering and slay it c. This and the next Verse differ not from the foregoing and therefore need no Explication Ver. 35. Verse 35 And the Priest shall burn them upon the Altar according to the offerings made by fire unto the LORD Or rather upon the Offerings or after the Burnt-offering See III. 5. And the Priest shall make an atonement for his sin c. And if by the same Error he had committed several sins there was a distinct Atonement to be made for every one of them So that if he had committed ignorantly the XLIII Offences before-mentioned though it were by one and the same Error he was bound to offer as many expiatory Sacrifices as Maimonides resolves in the fore-named Treatise Schegagoth cap. 4. This and such like things made this Law a Yoke which they were not able to bear as St. Peter speaks XV Acts 10. CHAP. V. Ver. 1. Verse 1 IF a soul sin In the manner following And hear
any Oil to it which was more costly and also had something of Magnificence in it Kings and Priests being anointed and therefore not becoming the meanness or the grief and humility of the Person that brought this Offering For which reason Frankincense was also omitted being a pleasant thing and not fit to be added to an Offering for sin which was offensive to God To this purpose the same R. Levi in the same place And we find this imitated also by the Heathen for Pliny saith in his Preface to Vespasian before his Natural History Mola tantum salsa litant qui non habent thura Ver. 12. Verse 12 Then shall he bring it to the Priest Confessing his Sin to him as is ordered v. 5. for which he desired this Offering might be accepted And the Priest shall take his handful of it even a memorial thereof For an Acknowledgment of his Fault and as a Caution to him hereafter Ver. 13. Verse 13 And the Priest shall make an atonement for him as touching the sin that he hath sinned in one of these With one of these three fore-mentioned Sacrifices either with a Lamb or with two Turtles or young Pigeons or with fine Flour For as Rasi hath observed there are three sorts of Men Rich Poor and very Poor and so three sort of Offerings are prescribed in this Chapter sutable to each of their Abilities And the remnant shall be the Priests as a meat-offering See Chapter the second v. 2 3. where the whole Meat-offering except one handful is given to the Priest who had nothing at all of some of the Sin-offerings mentioned in the foregoing Chapter v. 12 21. which were intirely consumed Ver. 14. Verse 14 And the LORD spake unto Moses saying Here begin the Orders which were given to Moses about another sort of Sacrifice near of kin to the former but delivered it is likely at some other time after he had written down the foregoing Laws about sin-Sin-offerings See IV. 1. Ver. 15. Verse 15 If a soul commit a trespass In the Hebrew this is a different phrase from what hath been hitherto used signifying another sort of Guilt And sin through ignorance in the holy things of the LORD By applying to his own private use any thing that was dedicated to God as Maimonides expounds it in his More Nevochim P. III. cap. 46. which might be committed in the payment of Tithes and in First-fruits and the First-born of Cattle or medling with that part of the Sacrifice which belonged to the Priest alone Which things he that committed presumptuously was to be cut off XV Numb 30. but if ignorantly he was to do as here is directed in this Verse But these words seem to be particularly restrained to the last of those things now mentioned eating any part of the Sacrifice which belonged to the Priest alone XXII 14. and the end of this Law as R. Levi Barcelonita speaks Praecept CXXII was to excite fear and reverence in all those who approached unto holy things Then he shall bring for his trespass unto the LORD a Ram without blemish out of the flocks As a Sheep was a more noble Species among Creatures than a Goat so a Ram was of a greater value among Sheep than a Female and therefore this Sacrifice was more costly than the Sin-offering mentioned v. 6. With thy estimation Besides his Sacrifice he was to make Satisfaction in Money according as the Priest should esteem the damage For that 's the meaning of with thy estimation according to the value thou shalt set upon the thing which he applied to his own use By shekels of silver At least two Shekels as the Jewish Doctors resolve After the shekel of the Sanctuary See XXX Exod. 13. The Jews were thus confined to these Rites and such as are mentioned v. 8 9. in the rest of these Prescriptions that there might be no room for Idolatrous Ceremonies nor might Men among themselves be left at liberty to invent impious or frivolous ways of Worship and that the Obedience of good Men might be also exercised in these minute matters and the contempt of wicked People be the more apparent in refusing to comply with these known Laws of God For a trespass-offering The Hebrew word Ascham which we translate Trespass-offering is so near of kin to Chattah which we translate Sin-offering that one of them is sometimes used for the other as I observed upon v. 6. yet there is a real difference between them though it be not easie to determine wherein it consists For the greatest Men differ in their opinion about the quality of the Offences for which these two kinds of Sacrifices were to be offered Some saying that the Offences for which Ascham was offered were inferior to those for which Chattah was offered which is the Opinion of Maimonides in his More Nevochim P. III. cap. 46. Others on the contrary think that the Offences which were expiated by Ascham were more grievous than those expiated by Chattah which is the Opinion of no less Man than the deservedly admired Bochartus in his Hierozoicon P. I. Lib. II. cap. 33. Where he adds that the former sort of sins were committed knowingly the other only ignorantly For so the LXX translate Chattah by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which seems to denote a Fault committed by Error and Mistake but Ascham by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which carries in it the Notion of something premeditated and designed But this is directly contrary to the very words of Moses here in this Verse which expresly speak of a Trespass committed through ignorance Aben-Ezra therefore distinguishes these two much better making Chattah to significe a Sacrifice which was made for the purging Offences committed through ignorance of the Law and Ascham for such as were committed through forgetfulness of the Law But as he gives no proof of this so he was sensible it was liable to exception there being one of this sort of Sacrifices mentioned v. 17. which he saw could not be comprehended under this Rule Others therefore think the former hath respect to Offences against God and the latter to those against Men not observing that the very same sort of sin which when it was known is called Chattah when it was doubtful is called Ascham From whence a very learned Person of our own now with God who had much and long considered this matter concludes That an Offence was peculiarly called Ascham which is a name for the Sin as well as for the Sacrifice as Chattah also is about which either a Man was dubious as in the following Verse or did a manifest damage to other Men. There being no Ascham or Trespass-offering commanded to be offered by the Law but for such Offences as were so committed against God that their Neighbours also were injured by them As in the Case of those who did eat holy things here mentioned whereby the Priests were damaged and of those mentioned VI. 2 3 4. and such as lay with a
Bond-woman betrothed to another XIX 20 21. Which are all the Cases belonging to this matter excepting that of the Nazarite defiled by the dead VI Numb 12. and of the Leper XIV 12. who were to be purged with a Sin-offering as well as with a Trespass-offering and therefore not to be considered in this matter See Dr. Owtram L. I. de Sacrificiis cap. 13. n. 8. and Samuel Petitus his Variae Lectiones cap. 22. who hath said the same but not so fully and distinctly If this do not satisfie yet it is plain the Sacrifices which go by this Name of Trespass-offerings and the Rites also about them were so different that they are sufficient to distinguish them from the other For none but Rams and Male-Lambs were admitted for Trespass-offerings which were not used at all in any Sin-offerings And the Blood of the Sin-offerings was put upon the Horns of the Altar as was noted in the foregoing Chapter v. 7 18 25. but that of the Trespass-offerings was sprinkled round about upon the Altar VII 2. Sin-offerings also were offered for the whole Congregation of Israel IV. 13. but Trespass-offerings only for private Persons which made Bonsrerius I suppose after a long discussion of this matter to conclude That the difference betwen Sin and Trespass consisted only in the Sacrifices which were offered for them See him upon the IVth Chapter of this Book v. 1. Ver. 16. Verse 16 And he shall make amends for the harm he hath done in holy things and shall add a fifth part thereunto c. Besides the Compensation mentioned in the foregoing Verse for the damage that was done according to the valuation made by the Priest there was a fifth part more to be added thereunto and given to the Priest who had suffered the damage And the Priest shall make an atonement for him with the Ram of the trespass-offering and it shall be forgiven him The Atonement was not made nor Forgiveness obtained till full Satisfaction for the wrong had been made Ver. 17. Verse 17 And if a soul sin and commit any of these things c. i. e. did eat any of the holy things before-mentioned which God forbad any but the Priests to eat Though he wist it not i. e. Be not certain whether they were holy or no. For the Hebrews generally call this Ascham Talui a dubious Trespass-offering being in a matter about which a Man was in Suspense whether he had offended or not Yet he is guilty and shall bear his iniquity He shall be obliged to offer this sort of Sacrifice Which was ordained saith R. Levi Barcelon Praecept CXXIII to make Men cautious and fear to sin and to attend diligently in all their Actions that they transgressed not the Laws of God Ver. 18. Verse 18 And he shall bring a Ram without blemish out of the flock with thy estimation c. The Offering before appointed v. 15 c. with this difference only that no fifth part was in this Case to be added because it was not certain whether he had transgressed or no. The Priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his ignorance wherein he erred and wist it not Did not know whether he had offended or not which distinguishes this from the Sin of Ignorance mentioned v. 15. And it shall be forgiven him But if he afterwards came to have a certain knowledge of his Offence he was not excused by this dubious Offering as Rasi observes but was bound also to offer a Sin-offering Ver. 19. Verse 19 It is a trespass-offering In this case a Sacrifice must be offered as well as in a certain Trespass He hath certainly trespassed against the LORD The words in the Hebrew are Ascham ascham lajhova which I think should be translated A Trespass-offering certainly unto the LORD That is in this doubtful case let him take a sure course by offering the Sacrifice here prescribed For though neither this sort of Sacrifices nor sin-Sin-offerings were to be voluntarily which was proper only to whole Burnt-offerings and Peace-offerings yet the very suspicion of a Guilt required a Sacrifice As for all those Offences which might be committed by Men who had no sense nor suspition of them they were expiated by the Sacrifices which were offered for the whole Congregation at certain stated times but no particular Person was to offer either Sin-offering or Trespass-offering of his own accord unless he knew or feared he had contracted some Guilt I cannot think fit to conclude this Chapter without taking notice how Jonathan paraphrases these last words of it who instead of saying he hath trespassed as it is commonly translated against the LORD saith against the Name of the Word of the LORD Which is an observation that might have been made in my Notes upon the two foregoing Books of Moses where many such passages occur which I did not mention And I should not have done it now being unwilling to swell this Commentary with any thing that doth not tend to the explaining the sense of the Text did not the impious Pamphlets that have lately been spread abroad against the Doctrine of the ever Blessed Trinity made it necessary for me to take this occasion to assert That this Doctrine was not unknown to the ancient Jews as appears even from the frequent mention of the Word of the LORD in the Chaldee Paraphrasts where the Hebrew hath only JEHOVAH or the LORD For which I can see no reason at all if there had not been a Notion among them of more Persons than One who were JEHOVAH It doth not always indeed carry this signification in it but there are very many places where by the WORD of the LORD cannot be meant a word spoken by the LORD or any thing else but a person speaking or acting c. who is the LORD There is a famous instance of it in XXVIII Gen. 20 21. where Jacob's Vow is thus translated by Onkelos Jacob vowed a vow saying if the WORD of the LORD will be with me and keep me c. then shall the WORD of the LORD be my God Where the WORD of the LORD is so plainly made the Object of his Adoration that it evidently shows they had a Notion in those days when Onkelos lived which was about our Saviour's time of more Persons than One who was the LORD The Hierusalem Targum also speaks this so clearly that one cannot but be something amazed to meet with such Expressions in it as those upon III Gen. 22. The WORD of the LORD said Behold Adam whom I have created is my only begotten in this World as I am the only begotten in the Heavens above Which may fairly induce a belief that St. John used the known Language of those times when he declared our blessed Saviour's Godhead under the Name of the WORD who was in the beginning with God and was God I Joh. 1. CHAP. VI. Ver. 1. Verse 1 AND the LORD spake unto Moses saying What here follows belonging unto the same
compensate the loss which the right Owner might have sustained by wanting the use of his Goods so long as the other had detained them in his hand by adding a full fifth part of the Principal as an amends for the wrong Yet if he had really forgotten that he had found such a thing as he was charg'd withal at the time he denied it upon Oath he was not bound to pay the fifth part more nor to offer the Expiatory Sacrifice though he really was possessed of the thing as Mr. Selden observes L. II. de Synedr cap. 11. p. 506. And give it unto him to whom it appertaineth If he had stolen from a Man the smallest piece of Money which the Jews call Peruta and had forsworn it they fancy he was bound to restore it to the Owner himself though he lived as far off as Media and it would not suffice to give it to his Son or his Attorney whom he had left to act for him Yet they are something humorsom in these Absurdities for they do not tye a Man to go so far to pay the fifth part though in a case where it was more than a Peruta See Bava kama cap. 9. sect 5 6. In the day of his trespass-offering Or in the day of his trespass that is as soon as he acknowledgeth his guilt as this word I showed v. 4. is to be interpreted And this agrees with what our blessed Saviour requires V Matth. 23. Ver. 6. Verse 6 And he shall bring his trespass-offering unto the LORD a Ram without a blemish This the Hebrews call an Offering for a certain guilt as that V. 15. was for a dubious With thy estimation c. R. Levi Barzelon interprets it a Ram worth two Shekels Praecept CXXIV Ver. 7. Verse 7 And the Priest shall make an atonement for him c. The Offender was not to think he was cleared by making Restitution and adding the fifth part whereby his Neighbour might well be satisfied but withal this Sacrifice was necessary for his Expiation without which no Satisfaction was made to the Divine Majesty The Jews themselves also think that this was prescribed to make them more sensible of their Sin and to render it more odious unto them as the same Author observes Ver. 8. Verse 8 And the LORD spake unto Moses saying Here the Hebrews begin a new Section of the Law as well as a new Chapter as we call it for the first seven Verses plainly belong to the Matter of the foregoing Chapter And it is reasonable to think that the following Precepts were given at a distinct time from the former See IV. 1. being about a different Matter For having declared what Offerings the People should bring to the LORD he now gives instructions to the Priests how they should manage the several Offerings that were brought Ver. 9. Verse 9 Command Aaron and his sons saying As before he bad Moses speak unto the Children of Israel I Lev. 2. IV. 2. because the Laws he then gave concerned them So now he bids him command Aaron and his sons what to do and acquaints them with the Laws that is the Rites they should observe in offering the several Sacrifices before directed to be made This is the Law of the burnt-offering He mentions that first which was first delivered and was the principal Offering being purely in honour of God whereas the other was occasioned by Mens sins or the Benefits he had bestowed on them It is the burnt-offering He explains what Burnt-offering he chiefly means viz. the daily Sacrifice which was the principal Burnt-offering according to which all other Offerings of that kind were to be regulated Because of the burning upon the Altar all night unto the morning Or for the burning upon the Altar c. This was the reason of its name because it was burning on the Altar from the Evening at which the Jews began their day till the Morning For which purpose the Priests watched all Night and put the Sacrifice upon the Altar piece by piece that it might be consumed by a slow and gentle fire As for the Morning Sacrifice it is not here mentioned because it was consumed with a quicker fire that there might be room for other Sacrifices that were commonly offered after it as appears from v. 12. and were only offered in the Morning not at Night But if there were no other Sacrifices to succeed it in the Morning then it is very likely that it was also kept burning till the Evening Sacrifice that God's Altar might always have Meat upon it And the fire of the Altar shall be burning in it Or For the fire of the Altar c. So it should be translated unless we translate the last word not in it but by it And the fire of the Altar shall be burning i.e. be fed or maintained by it Ver. 10. Verse 10 And the Priest shall put on his linen garment Mentioned XXVIII Exod. 40. And his linen breeches shall he put upon his flesh To cover his Secret Parts as appears from XXVIII Exod 42. And take up the ashes which the fire hath consumed with the burnt-offering c. Or rather When the fire hath consumed the burnt-offering on the Altar For the word ascher which we here translate which signifies also when and is so translated by us IV. 22. Or else the sense must be The ashes into which the fire hath consumed the Burnt-offering Or to make good our present translation a few words must be added in this manner The ashes of the Wood which the fire hath consumed with the Burnt-offering And he shall put them besides the Altar On the East-part of it as far as might be from the most holy place See I. 16. For this was most sutable to the Glory of the House of God saith R. Levi of Barcelona and the fire would burn better when the Altar was cleared from the Ashes Ver. 11. Verse 11 And he shall put off his garments Those before-named and put on other garments It is a question among the Jews whether he mean his common Raiment or some other Garments not holy and yet not quite common but of a middle nature It is most likely that the carrying the Ashes out of the Tabernacle being not an holy action as they were not to perform it in their Priestly i. e. Sacred Garments wherein they took them from the Altar so they did it in the common Habit which they wore when they did not minister Yet Rasi thinks this was not absolutely necessary but only fitting and seemly it being indecent to do this Work in the same Garments wherein they served at the Altar And the Ashes having been upon the Altar there are those as I said who fancy this was not a Work fit to be performed in their common Garments and therefore have devised an Habit of less dignity than those Garments wherein they Ministred which they used when they carried out the Ashes Thus Maimonides himself and others mentioned by
peace-offerings that pertain unto the LORD By these last words it appears that the whole Offering was the LORD's whose Bounty entertained him and his Friends to whom he gave the greatest part of it Having his uncleanness upon him c. In this Verse and in the next every one that had any legal defilement upon him is prohibited under a severe Penalty to eat of the Peace-offerings And they might be made unclean either by impurity in their own Body or by the contact of unclean things of the former of which he speaks in this Verse and of the other in the next Both were to be punished with cutting off which hath been explained elsewhere XVII Gen. 14. From whence it was that the Jews were so very careful not to go into the Judgment-Hall when our Saviour was condemned lest they should be defiled but that they might eat the Passover XVIII John 28. at which Feast Peace-offerings were offered together with the Paschal Lamb. See more of this XXII 2 3 4. Ver. 21. Verse 21 Moreover the soul that shall touch any unclean thing as the uncleanness of man or any unclean beast or any abominable unclean thing All these several sorts of Uncleanness contracted by touching things unclean we shall find in the following Chapters XI c. And shall eat of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace-offerings which pertain unto the LORD even that soul shall be cut off c. The intention of such Precepts was that the greater Reverence as Maimonides speaks P. III. More Nevoch cap. 41. might be maintained towards the Sacrifices which were offered unto God Upon which account Julian highly commends Moses who he saith as St. Cyril quotes his words Lib. IX contra Julian was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 truly religious about the eating of holy things which he proves from these very words of Moses But his conclusion from thence was very frigid as St. Cyril calls it That Christians were therefore to blame because they would not partake of such Sacrifices for we abstain not from them saith that Father as unclean things but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we rather make a progress as from Types unto the Truth Ver. 22. Verse 22 And the LORD spake unto Moses saying At the same time that all these Precepts were ordered to be delivered to the Priests he takes occasion to repeat several Precepts he had before given which concern all the People because it was of great moment to have them observed Ver. 23. Verse 32 Speak unto the children of Israel saying ye shall eat no manner of fat Because this was God's part and therefore not to be eaten by any one but burnt on his Altar See III. 16 17. And the reason Maimonides gives why it was reserved for him alone was because it was very delicious to the Taste More Nevoch P. III. cap. 41. Of Ox or of Sheep or of Goat The Jews restrain this Precept to these three sorts of Creatures which were the only Beasts that were offered at the Altar taking the Fat of all other Beasts to be lawful So R. Levi before-mentioned Praecept CXLIX Ver. 24. Verse 24 And the fat of the beast Of any of the fore-named Beasts which alone were allowed in Sacrifices That dieth of it self and the fat of that which is torn with Beasts may be used in any other use c. Though the Flesh of such Beasts was unclean yet they might apply the Fat when separated from the Body to any use only they might not eat it Ver. 25. Verse 25 For whosoever eateth the fat of the beast of which men offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD This seems to justifie the Opinion of those Jews who restrain the eating of Fat only to the three sorts of Creatures mentioned v. 23. as was there observed Even the soul that eateth it shall be cut off from his people If he did it presumptuously but if through inanimadvertence he was to be scourged as the Jewish Doctors affirm Yet if he did it a third time scourging did not suffice but they shut him up in a little Cave where he could not stand upright nor had room to sit down and there fed him with the Bread and Water of Affliction till his Bowels were sorely pinched c. as Maimonides describes this punishment See Schickard's Mischpat Hammeleck and Carpzovius his Annot. on him cap. 2. Theorer VII Ver. 26. Verse 26 Moreover ye shall eat no manner of blood whether it be of fowl or of beast See III. 17. Men were very prone to this in those times as Maimonides thinks whereby they ran into Idolatrous Worship Which was the reason God restrained them from it by threatning cutting off v. 27. to those who were guilty of it More Nevoch P. III. cap. 41. In any of your dwellings This is added to signifie that they might no more eat of the Blood of those Beasts which they killed at home than of those slain at the Altar Ver. 27. Whatsoever soul it be that eateth any manner of blood even that soul shall be cut off c. The reason of it is given XVII 10 11. But the Jews here distinguish particularly R. Levi Barcelonita Praecept CXLVIII between the Blood of the Soul or the Life as they speak and the Blood of a Member The former which run out freely when the Beast was killed in which was the Life of the Beast is that which is here meant as Moses more fully explains it in the place before-mentioned The other which remained in the several parts of the Beast they lookt upon as belonging to the Flesh and therefore might be eaten with it Ver. 28. Verse 28 And the LORD spake unto Moses saying He delivered at the same time some other Rules to be observed by the People in these Matters See v. 22. Ver. 29. Verse 29 Speak unto the children of Israel saying He that offereth the sacrifice of his peace-peace-offerings unto the LORD shall bring his oblation unto the LORD of the sacrifice of his peace-peace-offerings The meaning may be no more than this that before he and his Friends feasted together as is directed v. 15 c. he was to take care to bring his Oblation unto the LORD that is to see that God had his part of the Peace-offering for till that was offered none could meddle with the rest But if the import of the Hebrew words be well observed they seem to have a further meaning which is that whensoever any Man brought the Sacrifice which in the Hebrew is here called Zebach of his Peace-offerings he should also bring his Oblation which in distinction from the other is called Korban that is a Mincha or Meat-offering together with it that the Feast which was to be made might be compleatly furnished with Bread and Wine as well as the Flesh of the Sacrifice Ver. 30. Verse 30 His own hands shall bring the offerings of the LORD made by fire the fat with the breast it shall he bring The Sacrifice being
was gathered together The word we translate Assembly is the same with that in the foregoing Verse which we translate Congregation that is as I said the Assembly of the Elders Vnto the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation That they might be Witnesses of what was done and satisfie all the People that Aaron and his Sons did not intrude themselves into this Office but were solemnly called and consecrated to it by Moses the Servant of the LORD It is likely also that as many of the People as the place would conveniently hold met together to be Spectators of this Solemnity Ver. 5. Verse 5 And Moses said unto the Congregation this is the thing which the LORD commanded to be done I am now about to execute what God hath formerly commanded when I was with him in the holy Mount XXIX Exod. 4. At what time this was executed is a question among learned Men. And our great Primate of Ireland places this Consecration of Aaron and his Sons together with the Tabernacle and all things belonging to it in the second Month of the second Year after they came out of Egypt moved thereunto I suppose by what is said in VII Numb 1 2. So that according to his Opinion the numbring of the People and the separation of the Levites to God's Service preceded this Action But I do not see any reason why we should not think all things were done in the order wherein they are here related And then this Consecration was performed in the first month of that year after the Tabernacle had been erected and set apart for the Habitation of the Divine Majesty See XL Exod. 17 18. Ver. 6. Verse 6 And Moses brought Aaron and his sons To the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation as he had been directed XXIX Exod. 4. And washed them with water As is there also directed having first likewise washed himself XL. 31. Ver. 7. Verse 7 And he put upon him the Coat and girded him with the girdle c. Moses by an extraordinary Commission from God performed the Office of an High-Priest on this day and the six days following And put Aaron in possession of this Office by cloathing him with the Garments here mentioned according to the orders which had been given XXIX Exod. 5 c. which was thought sufficient for the Consecration of an High-Priest after the Captivity of Babylon when they wanted the holy Oil as hath been before observed Whence Philo often calls Moses by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i.e. High-Priest And in Schemoth Rabba the Tradition is that he continued High-Priest all the time they continued in the Wilderness though others they confess are of opinion which is the truth that he officiated only the seven days of the Consecration after which this Office was settled in Aaron See Selden L. I. de Succession in Pontificatum cap. 1. Ver. 8. Verse 8 And he put the breast-plate upon him also he put in the breast-plate the Vrim and the Thummim See XXVIII Exod. 30. It is observable that he saith nothing here in this place of the precious Stones but only mentions Vrim and Thummim as in XXXIX Exod. 10. where he describes the same thing he makes mention only of the four rows of Stones but saith not one word of Vrim and Thummim which I look upon as a proof that they were all one Ver. 9. Verse 9 And he put the Mitre upon his head and upon the Mitre the golden Plate the holy Crown c. According as God commanded him in XXVIII Exod. 36 37 c. XXIX 6. Ver. 10. Verse 10 And Moses took the anointing oil and anointed the Tabernacle and all that was therein See XXIX Exod. 26 c. and XL Exod. 9 10 11. There being several ways of anointing a Thing or Person either by pouring Oil upon them or by putting it upon them with the finger or by sprinkling it is not an improbable Conjecture of Fortunatus Scacchus that Moses anointed the Tabernacle and its Utensils by dipping his finger in the Oil and putting it upon them For though the word Maschah which he useth for anointing be general yet the Vulgar expressing it by linivit and the LXX by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which import this particular sort of anointing and there being different words used to express the anointing of the Altar and of Aaron it may well incline one to his Opinion Myrothec 2. Sacr. Elaeochrism cap. 70. And sanctified them Set them apart by this unction for the holy use for which they were designed Ver. 11. Verse 11 And he sprinkled thereof upon the Altar seven times and anointed the Altar and all its vessels c. We do not find this expresly before directed but the intention of anointing the Altar being to make it most holy because it was to sanctifie all that was laid upon it XXX Exod. 29. XL. 10. it was very fit it should be both sprinkled seven times with Oil and also anointed in token of its extraordinary Sanctity which was put upon it by this very solemn Rite For here are two distinct words about this anointing the first is jaz he sprinkled of the Oil upon it and then jimshach he anointed it by putting some of the Oil on it whereas it is said of the Tabernacle and of the things there only jimshach he anointed them without any sprinkling Some think that the Altar being mentioned twice in this Verse he speaks of the Altar of Incense as well as of the Altar of Burnt-offerings But it is plain by those places in Exodus it was the Altar of Burnt-offerings which was thus sanctified and here the Laver and its foot which stood in the same Court is said to be sanctified with it As for the Altar of Incense it is included in what is said in the foregoing Verse that he anointed the Tabernacle and all therein Both the laver and his foot to sanctifie them It may be thought that he sprinkled with Oil the Laver and its Foot as well as anointed them which is the opinion of the fore-named Fort. Scacchus But the Hebrew words will not warrant it for they only signifie that they were anointed as the Altar was after its aspersion Ver. 12. Verse 12 And he poured of the anointing oil upon Aarons head Here now is a third word distinct from the two former viz. jitzok which signifies there was more done to Aaron than to any of the holy things to sanctifie him to his office For the holy Oil was poured on his Head And anointed him Perhaps he drew the Oil with his finger upon his Forehead after it was poured on his Head as the Jews think he did See XXIX Exod 7 8. XXX 30. XL. 13. To sanctifie him i. e. Set him apart to this Sacred Office Now this Consecration of Aaron and his Sons being mentioned here together with the Consecration of the Tabernacle and all belonging to it it hath made some conclude that both were done at
the very same time But I have given some Arguments to prove the contrary upon XL Exod. 17 18. And the meaning of these three Verses 10th 11th 12th of this Chapter may be not that they were Consecrated at the same time but with the same Oil. For first he says Moses took the anointing Oil and shows how it was employed after a different manner upon the Tabernacle and its Utensils upon the Altar and upon Aaron on whose Head it was poured whereas the former had it only put upon them with the finger or were sprinkled with it But though they were not Consecrated together yet their Consecration immediately followed one another For seven days being spent in sanctifying the Tabernacle and the Altar then immediately began the sanctification of Aaron and his Sons during which time Moses may be supposed to have received the foregoing Laws about Sacrifices in which they were to be employed as soon as they were Consecrated And the seven days for the Consecration of Aaron and his Sons immediately succeeding the other seven days which were spent in the Consecration of the Tabernacle and the Altar it may be the reason why they here are succinctly mentioned both together and neither of them mentioned before For if the account we have in the XLth of Exodus concerning these things be well attended to it will appear that nothing is there said of the anointing of the Tabernacle or any thing else but only that he set it up the first day of the Month as he was commanded v. 2 c. and 17 c. And he is commanded in like manner to take the anointing Oil and anoint the Tabernacle and all therein v. 9 c. and then to anoint Aaron and his Sons v. 13 15. but he relates nothing of his doing either of them till now when he executed those commands Ver. 13. Verse 13 And Moses brought Aarons sons and put coats upon them and girded them with girdles c. See XXVIII Exod. 40 41. XXIX 30. XL. 14. As the LORD commanded Moses He commanded him also to anoint them at the same time XXVIII Exod. 41. XL. 15. but it is not here mentioned because they were not anointed as he was by pouring Oil upon their Heads but sprinkling it on their Garments with the Blood of the Sacrifice offered for them And that he did afterward as he had been ordered v. 30. See XXVIII Exod. 41. XXIX 7. Ver. 14. Verse 14 And he brought the bullock See XXIX Exod 1 10 c. For a sin-offering So it was designed to be XXIX Exod. 14. And Aaron and his sons laid their hands upon the head of the bullock for the sin-offering See XXIX Exod 10. I Levit. 4. Ver. 15. Verse 15 And he slew it XXIX Exod. 11. And Moses took the blood and put it upon the horns of the Altar round about with his finger As he had been directed XXIX Exod. 12. And purified the Altar It was purified before but this was a further purification of it that it might be the more fitted to be a place to make reconciliation upon it as it follows in the conclusion of the Verse And poured out the blood at the bottom of the Altar and sanctified it c. The vulgar Latin I think gives the true interpretation of these words rather than translates them in this manner It being expiated and sanctified he poured out the blood at the bottom of the Altar c. Fort. Scacchus hath taken a great deal of pains to prove that this Expiation as the Vulg. Lat. calls it went before the Anointing or Consecration of the Altar in his Myrothec P. II. cap. 34. But his Arguments seem to me of no force to overthrow the Opinion of Abulensis and Philo That these words do not speak of a proper Expiation of the Altar but that it was only hereby more particularly set apart as the word sanctifie signifies to be the place where Sin-offerings might be made that Men who had committed Offences might be expiated by these Sacrifices Ver. 16. Verse 16 And he took all the fat that was upon the inwards and the caul c. See XXIX Exod. 13. Ver. 17. Verse 17 But the bullock and his skin his flesh and his dung he burnt with fire without the camp as the LORD commanded Moses See XXIX Exod. 14. Yet we do not find that the Blood of this Sacrifice was carried into the holy place and therefore it did not fall under the Rule in the VIth Chapter of this Book v. 30. but might have been eaten by the Priests as is there allowed v. 26. Some think it sufficient for the solution of this to say that Aaron and his Sons were not yet compleatly Consecrated and therefore had not a right to eat of the Flesh of this Sin-offering But such Persons do not consider that Moses who now acted as a Priest could not be debarred of that benefit by this reason And therefore it is better to say that no High-Priest whether ordinary or extraordinary such as Moses now was might eat of any Sin-offering offered for the Priests themselves although the Blood of it was not brought into the Sanctuary From whence we may draw this Consequence that although the Sins of the People were taken away by the Priests who by eating of their Sin-offering plainly showed that they bare their sin as the phrase is X. 17. yet the Sins of the Priests themselves could not be taken away by any Sacrifice they could offer for sin of which they might not eat But they were to expect as an excellent Person of our own speaks Dr. Jackson Book IX upon the Creed cap. 26. a better Sacrifice made by a better High-Priest the Son of God But these Legal Sacrifices in the mean time were offered in such a place as prefigured the place where this better Sacrifice should be offered viz. without the Camp as when they came to their rest without the City of Jerusalem where our Saviour's Body was offered for our Redemption Ver. 18. Verse 18 And he brought the Ram for the burnt-offering and Aaron and his sons laid their hands upon the head of the Ram. According to the direction given to Moses when he was with God in Mount Sinai XXIX Exod. 15 16. where all that follows here to the end of the 21st Verse is explained this being nothing else but the execution of what was before ordered Ver. 22. Verse 22 And he brought the other Ram. For he was commanded to bring two v. 2. and XXIX Exod. 1. The Ram of Consecration So it is called XXIX Exod 22 31. for the reason there given Ver. 23 24. Verse 23 24. And he slew it and Moses took of the blood of it c. These two Verses are explained XXIX Exod. 20. where order was given for what was now done I shall only add a Remark of R. Levi ben Gersom upon the order wherein these Sacrifices were offered which was most rational For first there was a Sacrifice
for Sin offered v. 14. before they could be worthy to have any Gift or Present which they made to God received by him But upon their Expiation an whole Burnt-offering was accepted v. 18. and after that followed this Sacrifice which was a Peace-offering as appears from v. 31. part of which was burnt upon the Altar part given to the Priest and the rest they themselves ate for whom it was offered that it might appear they were so far in the favour of God as to eat with him of his Meat from his Table Abarbanel hath the same observation Ver. 25. Verse 25 And he took the fat and the rump c. All this Verse likewise is there explained XXIX Exod. 22. Ver. 26 27 28. Verse 26 27 28. And out of the basket of unleavened bread c. These three Verses show that Moses exactly followed the Orders he had received XXIX Exod 23 24 25. where they have been explained Ver. 28. Verse 28 Burnt them upon the burnt-offering This shows that they were not a burnt-offering properly as I there observed but an Appendix to it They were consecrations for a sweet savour Because they were offered to consecrate and sanctifie them as this is explained XXIX Exod. 33. See there Ver. 29. Verse 29 And Moses took the breast and waved it c. According to the direction given XXIX Exod. 26. where it is also ordered that this should be Moses his part Ver. 30. Verse 30 And he took of the anointing oil and of the blood that was upon the Altar and sprinkled it on Aaron c. See XXIX Exod. 21. where it appears plainly this blood that was mixed with the Oil was the Blood of the Ram of Consecration Ver. 31. Verse 31 And Moses said unto Aaron and his sons Boil the flesh at the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation and there eat it c. God having had his part v. 28. and Moses who performed the Office of a Priest at this time having had that which belonged to him on that account v. 29. the rest was given as the manner was in Peace-offerings to those for whom the Sacrifice was offered that is all but the right shoulder which was burnt upon the Altar and the Wave-breast which was given to Moses as Priest See XXIX Exod. 31 32. Ver. 32. Verse 32 That which remains of the flesh and the blood shall ye burn with fire See XXIX Exod. 34. This shows it was of the nature of a Peace-offering VII 15 17. Ver. 33. Verse 33 And ye shall not go out of the door of the Tabernacle in seven days c. For till then their Consecration was not perfected as the following words signifie no more than the Consecration of the Altar was till a Bullock had been offered to cleanse it and make an atonement for it seven days together See XXIX Exod. 35 36 37. This was to make them more sensible of the great weight as well as dignity of their Office Ver. 34. Verse 34 As he hath done this day so the LORD hath commanded to do to make an atonement for you Every day of these seven those Sacrifices were to be repeated the Sin-offering the Burnt-offering and the Peace-offering and their Garments were to be sprinkled with the Blood and the Anointing Oil as the LORD required when Moses was with him in the Mount XXIX Exod. 35. This shows the imperfection of all the Legal Sacrifices which would not have been so often repeated if they had been of greater efficacy Yet the continuance of them seven days doth signifie the compleat Consecration of these Priests according to the Rites of those times In conformity to which our great High-Priest the LORD Christ who was perfected by one Sacrifice of himself spent seven days in his Consecration to his Office For as Aaron is commanded to attend at the Tabernacle so many days together in like manner our LORD Christ as Dr. Jackson observes in the forenamed Book Chapt. XXV did attend the Temple five days one after another before his death See XII John 1 12 c. XXI Matth. 8 9 c. and having purged it on the first or second of those days from the prophaneness that was exercised in it by Merchandizing and afterward hallowed it by his Doctrine and by his Divine Presence which appeared in several miraculous Cures he went the sixth day into his heavenly Sanctuary into Paradise it self to puririsie and sanctifie it with his own Blood as Moses at Aaron's Consecration did the material Sanctuary and Altar with the Blood of Beasts And having rested the seventh day finished all by his Resurrection early the next day in the morning Ver. 35. Verse 35 Therefore shall ye abide at the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation Where all things mentioned in this Chapter had been done and were still to be repeated v. 3 4. for they could not go into the Sanctuary till they were compleated Day and night This was to make their Consecration more solemn and taken notice of by all the People Seven days By which means a Sabbath as the Jews observe passed over their heads without which they conceive Aaron and his Sons could not have been compleated But the Sabbath of the LORD did never so exactly pass over any High-Priest in his Consecration as it did over the High-Priest of the New Testament For however it were of Aaron's it was to our blessed Saviour as the fore-named Dr. Jackson notes a Day of Rest indeed after six days of Labour Watching Praying and Fasting which concluded in his bloody Death and Passion And keep the charge of the LORD That which he had now enjoyned Or rather watch the Tabernacle and his Vessels c. as they were to do in time to come The Hebrew Doctors have here raised a difficulty about the necessary Easements of Nature for which they had no convenience if they might not stir for seven days from the door of the Tabernacle and therefore they fancy there was a hole digged in the Ground for such occasions But it is more likely they were not so confined as not to be allowed this liberty and one cannot well doubt of it who considers the word Mismoroth here used which we translate keep the charge of the LORD which is a military phrase signifying the Stations and Watches kept in their turns for certain hours after which they were at liberty to attend their own Affairs Such was the charge here one may reasonably think of not departing from the door of the Tabernacle while they were upon the guard as we speak which some or other of them kept night and day in such order that while some watched others might sleep or step out about the necessary occasions of Nature That ye die not It may seem hard that they should be in peril of their Life if they omitted any of these Rites But this was necessary to make those serious and intent upon their business who were to save the Lives of
for the People and Blessing them We find an Example of it in XIV Gen. 18 19. And not long after Aaron's Consecration Moses delivered from God a form of words wherein the Priests should bless the People VI Numb 24. And at this day there is nothing done among the Jews with such Solemnity and in which they place so much Sanctity as this For when the Blessing is pronounced in their Synagogues they all cover their Faces believing they would be struck blind if they should look up because the Divine Majesty at that time sits upon the hands of the Priest So the same Wagenseil observes in the place above-named which shows not only how laborious they have been to maintain in the Peoples minds an opinion that God is still as much present with them in their Synagogues as he was anciently in the Tabernacle and Temple but how high a value they set upon the Divine Blessing pronounced by his Ministers And came down from offering the sin-offering and the burnt-offering and peace-offerings He pronounced the Blessing before he came down from the Altar which stood upon raised Ground though there were no steps to it XX Exod. 26. that all the People might the better see what was done while he offered all these Sacrifices for them and lift up his hands to implore God's Blessing upon them Ver. 23. Verse 23 And Moses and Aaron went into the Tabernacle of the Congregation The Sacrifice being ended it is likely Moses went with Aaron into the Sanctuary to instruct him how to sprinkle the Blood and to burn Incense and order the Shew-bread and such like things as were to be done only in the Holy Place And came out and blessed the people I suppose that all the Sacrifices before-mentioned might be offered after the Morning Sacrifice v. 17. which took up a great deal of time before they were all compleated After which Moses and Aaron went into the Sanctuary and stayed there till the time of the Evening Sacrifice and then came out and dismissed the People with a new Blessing when the Evening Sacrifice was finished And the Glory of the LORD appeared unto all the people That Glory which filled the Tabernacle XL Exod. 34 35. now appeared without either at the door of it or upon it in the sight of all the People as Moses had foretold v. 6. Ver. 24. Verse 24 And there came a fire out from before the LORD Either out of the Sanctuary from the Holy of Holies or from that Glory which now appeared unto them and sent out flashes of fire which burnt up the Sacrifice In either of these senses it may be said to come from the face of the LORD as the Hebrew phrase is And consumed upon the Altar the burnt-offering and the fat It seems to me most natural and easie to take this Burnt-offering and its Fat for the Evening Sacrifice which concluding the work of this day God gave a special Token of his acceptance of all the other Sacrifices by consuming this and likewise publickly testified his approbation of all the fore-mentioned Rites of the Ministry of Aaron whose Authority was hereby established in a miraculous manner To confirm this it may be noted that as the place which God chose for his Worship and Service was afterward designed in the time of David after the very same manner 1 Chron. XXI 26. So it was at the time of the Evening Sacrifice as may be gathered from 2 Sam. XXIV 15. where it is said the Pestilence continued from Morning to the time appointed that is to the Evening and then David saw the Angel who commanded Gad to bid him set up the Altar in the Threshing-floor of Araunah where God answering him by fire from Heaven it made him say This is the House of God and this is the Altar of Burnt-offering 1 Chron. XX. II. 1. And when Solomon built the Temple in that very place it was thus consecrated by fire coming from Heaven and consuming the Burnt-sacrifice as well as by the Glory of the LORD filling the House 2 Chron. VII 1 2 3. And it is very probable also that this was at the time of the Evening Sacrifice for the former part of the day had been spent in bringing the Ark into the House of the LORD and in Solomon's Prayer as we read in the two foregoing Chapters Certain it is that the Authority of Elijah to restore God's true Religion and Worship was thus justified 1 Kings XVIII 38 39. and it was at the time of the offering the Evening Sacrifice v. 36. From whence that Prayer of the Psalmist CXLI Psal 2. Let the lifting up of my hands be as the evening sacrifice All this was so notorious that Julian himself acknowledges that fire came down from Heaven in the time of Moses and again in the days of Elijah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consuming the Sacrifices as we find his words related by St. Cyril L. X. contra Julianum And this gave such a Divine Authority to the Jewish Religion that it is no wonder to find that the Pagans indeavoured to get credit to their Religion by the like reports of fire from an invisible Power consuming their Sacrifices which perhaps was sometimes really done by the Prince of the Power of the Air as the Apostle calls the Devil However that be there are several Instances of this in Pausanias Dionysius Halicarnassaeus Valerius Maximus and Pliny But Servius may serve instead of all who upon those words of Virgil in Aeneid XII faedera fulmine sancit saith that anciently they did not kindle fires upon their Altars sed ignem divinum precibus eliciebant c. but they procured by their Prayers Divine fire which inflamed their Altars And Solinus saith cap. 11. that the flame sprung out of the Wood by a Divine Power Si Deus adest si sacrum probatur Sarmenta licet viridia ignem sponte concipiunt c. If God be present if the Sacrifice be acceptable the Faggots though green kindle of themselves and without any one to set them on fire a flame is raised by the Deity to whom the Sacrifice is offered Thus there rose up fire out of the rock and consumed Gideon's Sacrifice VI Judg. 21. They that would see more of this out of Pagan Writers may consult J. Dilherrus Dissert Special de Cacozelia Gentil cap. 11. But especially Huetius in his Alnetanae Quaestiones L. II. cap. 12. n. 21. But whether this Fire which now came from before the LORD consumed Aaron's Sacrifice instantly or only set it into a flame which consumed it leisurely in the sight of all the People cannot certainly be determined The Jews seem to suppose the latter the heavenly fire being now kindled which continued ever after by a constant supply of Fewel whereby it was kept perpetually burning as is ordained VI. 12 13. See Note on that place Where to me it seems very observable that this Law of keeping in the fire perpetually is ordered to
be put in execution at the Evening Sacrifice v. 9. of that Chapter Which is a sufficient Reason to incline one to think that the Celestial Fire now came as I have supposed at the Evening Sacrifice and consumed the Burnt-offering Which when all the people saw they shouted They fled not from it as Men affrighted but shouted for joy or as Abarbanel's phrase is they lifted up their voices with singing and prayed to God or rather praised him Just as they did when the Fire came down at the Consecration of Solomon's Temple When the people saw it they praised the LORD saying for he is good for his mercy endureth for ever 2 Chron. VII 3. And fell on their faces Worshipped God with humble Thankfulness who hereby testified his Presence among them and his gracious Acceptance of them For thus he had of old showed his Respect to Abel IV Gen. 4. and to Noah VII 20. and to their Father Abraham whose Sacrifice was thus accepted in the Evening when the Sun went down XV Gen. 17. And there was great reason that both Priests and People should rejoyce at this sight For as the Author of the Book Cosri discourses Pars III. sect 53. if a Man look only at the foregoing part of the Work of this day the killing of the Sacrifices the Blood running about their hands their slaying of them washing the Entrails rinsing the Pieces of the Flesh sprinkling the Blood laying the Wood in order kindling the Fire they would rather set his Mind further off from God than draw it near to him till after all these things performed orderly he saw the Fire coming down from Heaven testifying God's gracious acceptance of the Sacrifice or felt another Spirit excited in him beyond any thing he was acquainted withal before or had Divine Dreams or Heroical Motions which he believed were the Effects of what he had been doing c. And no doubt all good Men in future Ages felt their Minds raised by the thoughts that the Sacrifices they offered were as acceptable to God as that offered at this time being consumed in some sort by the same Fire which burnt continually on this Altar and after this day was never extinguished till the Captivity Which seems to be the Original of that Expression of the People in their Prayer for their King That God would remember all his Offerings and accept turn to ashes it is in the Hebrew his burnt Sacrifice XXI Psal 3. Such acceptable Sacrifices St. Cyril tells Julian we Christians still offer but infinitely better being Spiritual and Intellectual and consequently nearer to the Divine Nature and that by Fire sent from Heaven viz. the Holy Ghost of whom this Fire was but a Figure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illustrating the Church and inabling the Members of it to offer continually the sweet smelling Sacrifices of Faith and Hope and Charity and Righteousness Temperance Obedience perpetual Doxologies and all other Vertues L. X. contr Jul. CHAP. X. Ver. 1. Verse 1 AND Nadab and Abihu the sons of Aaron His two eldest Sons VI Exod. 23. Took either of them his Censer Here are two of their Errors expressed in these words if Abarbanel conjecture aright who supposes this to have hapned on the last day of their Consecration when Fire came down from Heaven First That they adventured without any order from God to go and burn Incense in the Sanctuary For though this did not belong to the Office of the High-Priest alone yet upon this Solemn Day Aaron only was commanded to perform the whole Service as upon the Day of Expiation IX 7. And this account Bochartus gives of their Offence that sine vocatione thus obtulerunt they offered Incense without any call to it Hierozoic P. I. L. II. cap. 49. p. 557. And secondly both of them went about this Work whereas the Incense was to be offered only by one and not by two at a time Procopius Gazaeus adds a third Error that they attempt this out of the due season for it which was only in the Morning and Evening And put fire thereon As the Priests were required to offer no strange Incense XXX Exod. 9. so in all reason they were to think it was not to be offered with strange fire but only with a Coal from that Altar where there was a fire kindled by God himself And offered strange fire before the LORD Here are two sins more if Abarbanel take it right that they brought Fire from another place without the Sanctuary and did not take it from the Altar and then that they attempted to go into the most holy place which he thinks is signified by these words before the LORD The first of these is the Opinion also of Aben-Ezra and other learned Men among the Jews who by strange fire understand fire that did not go out from before the LORD IX 24. that is was not taken from the Altar of Burnt-offering where Fire from Heaven lately consumed their Oblations And so R. Bechai They imagined that the Fire on the Altar of burnt-Burnt-offerings was only for consuming Sacrifices and therefore they fetcht some from without for the burning Incense But as to the second thing it doth not seem to me probable for Aaron himself had not yet gone into the Holy of Holies Which he commanded them not This they did saith Aben-Ezra from their own proper Motion and Opinion without any Authority from God for whose order they should have waited if his Mind was not already sufficiently declared as it was fully afterwards XVI 12. How two such excellent Men as these who had had the honour to be called up to God when he appeared on Mount Sinai and to have a sight of him and to eat and drink in his Presence XXIV Exod. 1 9 10 c. came to be so rash and to fall so unadvisedly into so great an Error as this here mentioned cannot be certainly resolved But it seems to me highly probable that at the Feast upon the Peace-offerings they had eaten and drunk too liberally which made them forget themselves and fall into this gross mistake For I can see no other reason why that Command v. 8. of not drinking Wine or strong Drink when the Priests were to go into the Sanctuary is annexed unto this story of their Death and Burial but only this which I have now alledged that their Miscarriage arose from drinking too much Wine before this Office was to be performed Ver. 2. Verse 2 And there went out fire from the LORD As they were entring into the Sanctuary or as they stood at the Golden Altar ready to offer Incense Fire came out from the most Holy Place where the Glory of the LORD was and struck them dead And devoured them It did not reduce their Bodies to Ashes nor so much as burn their Clothes v. 5. but they were killed as Men sometimes are with Lightning which penetrates into the Vital Parts and puts a sudden end to their Life That 's meant
here by devoured them took away their Breath in a moment From which Expression the Hebrew Doctors conclude that when any body was condemned to be burnt it was not to be consumed to Ashes but only exanimated by the Fire because this is called devouring or burning here in this place See Gamera Sanhedrim cap. 7. n. 1. And they died before the LORD Fell down dead in the House of God Which may seem too great a Severity till it be considered how reasonable and necessary it was to inflict a heavy Punishment upon the first Transgressors of a Law concerning a Matter of great moment to deter others from the like Offence Many instances of which there are in Scripture Some observed by St. Chrysostom upon VI Psal 2. where he gives this account why the Man who gathered a few sticks upon the Sabbath-day was adjudged to be stoned as Blasphemers were because it was a very heinous thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. as soon as a Law was enacted immediately to break it which made it necessary it should be thus severely punished to strike such a Terror into others that they might not dare to do the like Which was the reason he observes of the sudden Death of Ananias and Sapphira mentioned Acts V. Isidore of Peleusium hath made the same observation Lib. I. Epist. 181 and goes so far back as to our first Parents who were dreadfully punished for a seemingly small Offence because they were the first Transgressors The same others have observed of the punishment of Cain who committed the first Murder of the filthiness of Sodom of the Idolatry of the Golden Calf the Covetousness and Sacriledge of Achan the Disobedience of Saul the first King of Israel the sudden Death of Vzzah who was the first that presumed to touch the Ark of God Ver. 3. Verse 3 And Moses said unto Aaron To satisfie him in the Justice and Wisdom of this dreadful stroke at which he could not but be extreamly afflicted This is that the LORD spake saying I will be sanctified in them that come nigh me To come nigh unto God is in the holy Language to perform the Office of a Priest XIX Exod. 22. XVI Numb 5. who having the honour of attending upon the Service of the Divine Majesty were bound to approach into his Presence with the greatest Reverence We do not read indeed those very words which Moses here recites in the foregoing Books But as many things were spoken to them which are not recorded so the sense of these words are in the place forenamed XIX Exod. 22. and the reason of them in XXIX Exod. 43 44. where the Tabernacle being said to be sanctified by the Divine Glory and the Priests being sanctified to minister unto him therein which was seven days a doing as we read here VIII 35. they were plainly taught to draw nigh to God with a holy Fear and to do nothing rashly nor without order from him For God being peculiarly known by the Name of the Holy One i. e. who hath incomparable Perfections such as no other Being hath he justly required to be accordingly worshipped sutable to his most surpassing Greatness by peculiar Rites of his own prescribing in a different manner from all other Beings It was for instance below his Emenency or rather Supereminent Majesty to have common Fire such as they imployed in their Kitchins used for the burning Sacrifice upon his Altar And in like manner all other parts of his Service were in reason to be performed after such a fashion as might signifie their sense of the peculiar Excellencies of the Divine Nature who therefore sent Fire from Heaven as only fit to burn perpetually upon his Altar And before all the people will I be glorified This may be thought to be but a solemn Repetition of what was spoken before as the manner is in these Books to deliver the same thing twice in different words Or the meaning is if they who draw nigh to me will not sanctifie me I will vindicate my own honour by such Punishments as shall openly declare to all that I am the Holy One. Thus God is said to be honoured upon Pharaoh by drowning him in the Red-sea XIV Exod. 4. And Aaron held his peace Silently adored the Justice of the Holy One and did not complain of his Severity For this doth not seem to be the effect meerly of great Grief but of great Reverence to the Divine Majesty Ver. 4. Verse 4 And Moses called Mishael and Elzaphan the sons of Uzziel the uncle of Aaron It appears from VI Exod. 18. that Vzziel the Father of Mishael and Elzaphan v. 22. was the younger Brother of Amram the Father of Aaron and consequently Aaron's Uncle And said unto them Come near and carry your brethren All near Kindred are called Brethren in Scripture And these Cosin Germans of theirs are appointed to carry them out because Aaron's other Sons were now attending upon God in their Ministration upon the Day of their Consecration But without this special order these two Persons could not have been admitted to come near into the very Sanctuary being not of the Family of Priests though of Kin to him From before the Sanctuary See v. 2. Out of the Camp For anciently they buried not in their Cities but in the Fields adjacent to them XXIII Gen. 9 17. and so they did in after times XXVII Matth. 7. and VIII Luke 27. where the Tombs are plainly intimated to be without the City Ver. 5. Verse 5 So they went near There being two Accents upon the Hebrew word for draw near the Cabbalists from thence observe I know not upon what grounds that these Men did not come into the very Sanctuary where the dead Bodies lay but drew them out with long Poles and those of Iron being afraid of the Fire wherewith Nadab and Abihu had been killed or rather fearing to go into the Sanctuary or too near it See Hackspan's Cabala Judaica n. 58. And carried them out in their Coats c. Their Linen Vestments wherein they ministred which having touched dead Bodies were no more fit to be used in the Divine Service As Moses had said As he had directed in his order which he gave them Ver. 6. Verse 6 And Moses said unto Aaron and unto Eleazar and unto Ithamar his sons These two were all the Sons that Aaron had now remaining from whom came two great Families of the Priests which in the days of David we find very numerous though more of the House of Eleazar than of the other when they were by him divided into XXIV Classes and had their Courses of waiting appointed them 1 Chron. XXIV 4 c. Vncover not your heads The Hebrew Doctors interpret it quite contrary Let not the head of your hair grow so long that is as to cover their Faces which was the custom of Mourners 2 Sam. XV. 30. XIX 4. and many other places And thus Onkelos and the Arabick Version set forth by
Erpenius and many of the Jewish Commentators such as R. Solomon and Aben-Ezra who give the same account of XXI Lev. 10. where the same thing is required of the High-Priest And the time of their letting their Hair grow on such occasions they determine by the Law of the Nazarites who were not to cut their Hair all the time of their Vow of Separation which the Jews say was at least XXX days VI Numb 5. Therefore the Priests were not to let their Hair grow so long if they did they were uncapable of officiating Only they make this difference between the common Priests and the High-Priest that this Law did not bind the Priests at all times but only in their Course of Ministration but the High-Priest whose Presence was always necessary in the Sanctuary might never let his Hair grow but was bound every Week to have it cut even on the Eve of the Sabbath See Selden L. II. de Success in Pontiff cap. 6. But the foundation of all this is not very strong for it relies chiefly on the use of the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that place of Numbers VI. 5. where it signifies Hair from whence they conclude the Verb here may have the same Notion and signifie the growth of Hair But this is not the usual signification of it in Scripture where it commonly imports the rejection of something as of good Counsel I Prov. 25. of Reproof or Instruction XIII Prov. 18. XV. 32. And being joyned with the Head plainly signifies the uncovering it See V Numb 18. And therefore so the LXX understand it here as if they were forbidden to put off their Bonnets But that they always did as soon as they had performed their Sacred Office in the Sanctuary and therefore it may be meant of making their Heads bare by shaving them or bald by pulling off the Hair as the manner was in Mourning XV Isa 2. XLI Jer. 5. XLVIII 37. and many other places And in this the Priests among the Jews directly opposed those among the Egyptians who shaved their Heads as appears by what Minutius Faelix and Lampridius in the Life of Commodus say concerning the Priests of Isis And Herodotus also in his Euterpe whose words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In other places the Priests of the Gods nourish their hair but in Egypt they are shaved Neither rend your Clothes Which was another Rite of Mourning not only among the Jews but among all People in ancient Times especially in the Eastern Countries as every one knows that hath read any of their Authors See I Job 20. And it was used on many other occasions among the Jews as well as in their Funerals particularly when any Man blasphemed XIV Numb 6. 2 Kings XIX 1. when any ill Tidings came which put them into a Passion 2 Kings V. 7. or any Misfortune befel them XLIV Gen. 13. XI Judg. 35. But was thought so unseemly in a Priest especially when he ministred that the Jews say they whose Garments were rent by accident were as uncapable of ministring as they who rent them themselves in Mourning The reason of this Precept was as R. Levi of Barcelona well observes Praecept CLV that it being not allowed in those Countries for Mourners to come into the Presence of their Kings as appears by the History of Esther much less was it seemly for any that attended upon the Divine Majesty to come into his House in such a Habit. Lest ye die As Nadab and Abihu did For after such a Monition as this they had highly dishonoured God if they had appeared in his Sanctuary in such an indecent manner And wrath come upon the people For want of Priests to make atonement for them when they offended But let your brethren the whole house of Israel bewail the burning which the LORD hath kindled He doth not prohibit the rest of the People who were not Priests to mourn for them but rather requires it of them all that they might be sensible of their loss and of the the sin which was the cause of it And it is likely the People bewailed them by rending their Clothes and baring their Heads and putting Ashes upon them or some such Rites then in use among them Ver. 7. Verse 7 And ye shall not go out from the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation For it is supposed the seven days of their Consecration were not yet quite ended VIII 35. or they had begun some other Ministration in the Sanctuary and therefore were not to stir out of the Court of it till it was sanctified And the Hebrews think this Law did not only bind Aaron and his Sons at this time but their Posterity for ever that if they heard of the death of any of their Kindred when they were ministring in the Sanctuary they should not stir from their Duty For that would have been to show a greater affection to a dead Friend than to the living God This appears to be true by the like command to this and in the same words laid particularly upon the High-Priests XXI 12. For the anointing of the LORD is upon you You are devoted and consecrated by a Solemn Unction VIII 10 c. to the Service of God which must not be omitted out of respect to any Person whatsoever For in this Precept as R. Levi Barcelonita observes Praecept CLVII the Dignity and Majesty of the Divine Worship was consulted which if his Ministers had deserted on such occasions for a moment would have been brought into contempt For it would have been a declaration that there was something in the World more to be regarded than God's Service And therefore the punishment of Death is threatned in the foregoing words to those who were guilty of such an offence And they did according to the word of Moses Staid in the Tabernacle without any of the usual Tokens of Mourning Wherein they performed an eminent piece of Obedience to God whose commandment suppressed those natural Affections which are very hard to be kept in subjection Ver. 8. Verse 8 And the LORD spake unto Aaron saying It may be thought that the LORD was so pleased with his Obedience that he himself now spake unto Aaron whereas hitherto he had spoken to him by Moses Ver. 9. Verse 9 Do not drink wine nor strong drink thou nor thy sons with thee By Wine every one knows is meant that Liquor which is pressed out of Grapes And by Schechar which we translate strong Drink is meant such Liquors as were made in imitation of Wine of Dates or Figs and many other sorts of Fruits also that which was made of Honey which we call Mede and Metheglin There are many sorts of such Liquors mentioned by Pliny in his Natural History Lib. XIV cap. 16. which he calls Vina factitia When ye go into the Tabernacle of the Congregation To perform your Ministry At other times they might drink Wine and if we may believe the Jews they did not
offend against this Precept if before they went into the Sanctuary they drank no more than the fourth part of a Log which contained an Egg-shell and an half If they exceeded this measure then their Ministry they say was profaned and they were liable to death by the hand of Heaven See R. Levi of Barcelona Praecept CLVIII who hath many Niceties about this matter as hath also Maimonides mentioned by the learned Dr. Outram in his Book de Sacrificiis Lib. I. cap. 6. n. 9. Lest ye die As their Brethren did See upon v. 1. where I observed it to be very probable that they were burnt with Fire from the LORD upon this account They that think it worth their while may see after what manner the Cabbalists make out this and what Reflections they make upon it in Theod. Hackspan's Cabala Judaica n. 144 145. It shall be a statute for ever throughout your Generations And such a Law there was in some Heathen Countries that no Magistrate all the year he was in Office nor any Judge while he was in Action and Employment should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so much as taste a drop of Wine So Plato tells us with which Eusebius compares this Law of Moses Lib. XII Praepar Evang. cap. 25. And Chaeremon the Stoick describing in Porphery's Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. IV. the Diet of the Egyptian Priests tells us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some of them drunk no Wine at all and others very little Ver. 10. Verse 10 That ye may put a difference between holy and unholy between clean and unclean Here is the ground and reason of this Precept that they might have their Wits about them as we speak and preserve their Minds from being clouded as Nabad's and Abihu's were who put no difference between holy Fire and common and so be able both to put a difference as the first words may be translated between holy and unholy c. and also to teach the People all the Statutes which God had delivered to them as it follows in the next Verse And here it must be observed that as some days and places were more holy than others so were some parts of the Sacrifices also which they might not eat themselves but were reserved for the Altar Some Beasts also were clean and others so unclean that they might neither be offered in Sacrifice nor eaten at their common Tables XI 47. Some Men and Women also were so unclean that they were not to be admitted into their ordinary Conversation much less into the Sanctuary Chap. XII XIII Of all which the Priests were the Judges and therefore had need to be perfectly sober that they might make an accurate difference between one thing and another And for such a like reason it was the Egyptian Priests were so abstemious in drinking Wine because they looked upon it as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an impediment to the finding out of Truth So Chaeremon speaks in the forementioned Book Ver. 11. Verse 11 And that ye may teach the Children of Israel all the Statutes c. Which concern the Rites and Ceremonies of God's Worship Ver. 12. Verse 12 And Moses spake unto Aaron and unto Eleazar and unto Ithamar his sons that were left This was still spoken on the same day a little after what he had said to them v. 6 7. Take the meat-offering that remaineth of the offerings of the LORD made by fire c. He seems to have been afraid that Aaron's grief for the loss of his Sons might have so disturbed his Mind as to have made him negligent in some part of his duty or that Eleazar and Ithamar through mistake or forgetfulness might have offended against some of the Laws lately delivered about Sacrifices which therefore he here repeats that they might be exactly observed And in the first place that they should eat what remained of the meat-offering as was commanded VI. 16. Where it is required also as it is here to be eaten without leaven and beside the Altar in the Court of the Tabernacle of the Congregation as it is there expressed For it is most holy See there VI. 17. Ver. 13. Verse 13 And ye shall eat it in the holy place This he repeats because they might possibly have forgotten it or not sufficiently attended to the difference between things most holy and things only holy The former of which the Priests alone might eat and that only in the holy place the other all their Family might eat as he saith in the next Verse in any place that was clean Because it is thy due and thy sons due c. No body might eat it but holy Persons for so God directed Chapt. II. 3. VI. 16 17 18. VII 9 10. Ver. 14. Verse 14 The wave-breast and the heave-shoulder shall ye eat in a clean place They were not bound to eat these in the Court of the Tabernacle as in the former case v. 13. but in any part of the Camp that was not defiled Thou and thy sons and thy daughters with thee These being those which the Jews call lighter holy things might be eaten by the whole Family as was before observed For they be thy due and thy sons due which are given you out of the sacrifice of peace-offerings of the Children of Israel They were bestowed upon them by an express Grant VII 34. where though only his Sons be mentioned as they are here yet it is plain all of their Family who were clean might eat of these things See upon VII 19. Ver. 15. Verse 15 The heave-shoulder and the wave-breast shall they bring with the offerings made by fire of the fat to wave it for a wave-offering before the LORD This also he inculcates again which had been said before VII 29 30. that they must take care first to wave these things before the LORD and to burn the Fat upon the Altar for till this was done they had no right to eat these things And it shall be thine and thy sons with thee When they had been presented to the LORD of the whole Earth and he had received his part these became theirs by an express Grant from him VII 32 33 34. By a statute for ever As long as such kind of Sacrifices should last Ver. 16. Verse 16 And Moses diligently sought the Goat of the sin-offering Which had been offered for the People IX 15. And behold it was burnt This justified Moses his suspicion and fear that some mistake might have been committed in other matters because he found upon a diligent inquisition that they had burnt upon the Altar those parts of the sin-offering which they ought to have eaten themselves VI. 26 29. In which it was the easier for them to mistake without diligent observation of Moses his directions because the sin-offering which had been offered for Aaron himself was just before wholly burnt without the Camp IX 11. and so were all the Sin-offerings for the High-Priest and for the whole Congregation
Hair of his head and his beard and his eye-brows And he shall wash his clothes This seems to be a second washing after the first at the end of seven days And the Hebrew Doctors note that the killing of the Bird the shaving and the sprinkling were all to be done in the day time the rest might be done either by day or by night Also he shall wash his flesh in water His whole Body For which end such a measure is prescribed by the Hebrew Tradition as would cover it intirely And he shall be clean So as to be not only restored to his Tent but admitted to go to the Tabernacle of the Congregation and offer the Sacrifices appointed in the following part of this Chapter for his compleat Purification Till which time he was called Mechussar Kapparah one that needed Expiation and was not permitted to eat of the holy things Ver. 10. Verse 10 And on the eighth day If we may believe the Hebrew Tradition he washed himself again on this day in the Court of the Women where there was a Room called the Chamber of the Lepers provided for that purpose So Maimonides Which great Caution was imitated by the primitive Christians who would not receive great Sinners into their Communion again till they had made a long trial of the Truth of their Repentance He shall take two he-lambs without blemish and one ewe-lamb without blemish There were three kinds of Sacrifices to be offered upon this occasion viz. a Trespass-offering a Sin-offering and a Burnt-offering for which these three Lambs were to be provided Of the first year Such were all the Lambs to be both Male and Female And three tenth deals of fine flour for a Meat-offering To each of these Sacrifices there was a Meat-offering appointed consisting of a tenth part of an Ephah of fine Flour i. e. an Omer See XVI Exod. 36. Which is a thing unusual for we read of no Meat-offerings ordered in the IV. and Vth Chapters of this Book which treat of them to accompany either Trespass-offerings or Sin-offerings But there were peculiar Rites belonging to the cleansing of a Leper different from the common Usages to make him sensible how great a Mercy he had received from God who alone could cure this Disease which his hand had inflicted Mingled with oil As the manner was in Meat-offerings See Chap. II. v. 1. And one log of oil Which served to another purpose mentioned v. 15 16. of this Chapter And Oil being of an healing vertue may be thought to denote the perfect Health and Soundness to which the Leper was now restored as the fragrancy of it put him in mind of the Happiness he now enjoyed A Log was the smallest Measure among the Jews containing about half a Pint of our Measure as a very learned Prelate of our own Dr. Cumberland hath computed in his Scripture Weights and Measures p. 86. Ver. 11. Verse 11 And the Priest that maketh him clean Who performeth this office of declaring the Leper perfectly clean Shall present the man that is to be made clean and those things before the LORD at the door c. He set the Man in the first place at the East-gate of the Court of the Israelites which in after times was called the Gate of Nicanor with his face towards the Sanctuary For here all those who needed Expiation stood it being unlawful for them to enter into the Court of the Israelites until the Expiation was made So Maimonides observes in his Treatise called Mechussare Kapparah sect 4. Ver. 12. Verse 12 And the Priest shall take one he-lamb and offer him Next he was to bring one of the Lambs to the same place and present him to the LORD as is directed in the end of the Verse For that 's meant here by offering him the slaying of him following in the next Verse For a Trespass-offering After the manner that the trespass-Trespass-offerings were offered of which see Chap. VII that he might beg pardon of God as Abarbanel understands it for such sins as he had ignorantly committed And the log of oil Which was presented at the same time with the Lamb. And wave them Both the Lamb and the Log of Oil. For a wave-offering before the LORD Which was done by waving them to and fro up and down and turning towards all the four quarters of the World as was noted before But Maimonides saith this was waved towards the East and if he waved them both together or separated one from the other the Lamb first and afterward the Log of Oil it made no difference Ver. 13. Verse 13 And he shall slay the Lamb. The Lamb was brought saith the same Author in the fore-named Treatise to the Door of the Court where the leprous Man stood who stretcht out his hands into the Court and laid them upon his Sacrifice after which it was killed as is here directed In the place where he shall kill the sin-offering and the burnt-offering See VI. 25. In the holy place In the Court of the Tabernacle at the North-side of the Altar of Burnt-offering Chap. I. 11. which was a place more holy than the Entrance or East-end of the Court where the Peace-offerings were to be killed III. 2. For as the sin-offering is the Priests so is the trespass-offering See VII 7. Both of them were to be eaten by the Priests in the Court of God's House and therefore were equally holy It is most holy See II. 3. Ver. 14. Verse 14 And the Priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass-offering There stood two Priests as Maimonides represents it in his Treatise before-mentioned sect 4. ready to receive the Blood of the Lamb one in an holy Vessel with which he sprinkled the Altar the other in his right hand which he poured into his left And then with the fore-finger of his right hand put it upon the right Ear c. of him that was to be cleansed And the Priest shall put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is cleansed and upon the thumb of his right hand and upon the great toe of his right foot The Priest standing within the Court at the Entrance of it and the Man standing still without the Man thrust his Head within the Gate and the Priest put some of the Blood which he held in his hand upon the tip of his right Ear. After which the Man stretcht out his right Arm and the Priest put some of the same Blood upon the Thumb of his right Hand and next his right Leg on the great Toe of which he likewise put some more Blood Thus Maimonides in the same place Where he saith If the Priest had put the Blood upon the left Ear Thumb or Toe all had been of no effect And he adds sect 5. that the Blood was put upon half of the flap of his Ear and upon the whole breadth of the top of his Thumb and great Toe for if he put it on the sides
clothes i. e. The Man upon whom the Spittle fell Ver. 9. Verse 9 And what saddle soever he rideth upon c. By the same reason that the Seat he sat upon was defiled v. 4. Ver. 10. Verse 10 And whosoever toucheth any thing that was under him c. Either the Saddle or any thing else that was under him when he rode And he that beareth any of those things c. Removeth them from one place to another though it be to carry them out of the way that others may not be defiled by them unawares Ver. 11. Verse 11 And whomsoever he toucheth that hath the issue and hath not rinsed his hands in water he shall wash c. It is somewhat doubtful whether these words hath not washed his hands in water belong to him that had the Issue or to him that his hands touched Most understand it of the former That if the Man who had an Issue touched any other Man and had not first washt his hands that Man whom he touched should be defiled But the Syriack takes it to refer to the Man that was touched by him who if he did not immediately wash his hands with water was to be cleansed after a more laborious manner by washing his Clothes and bathing himself in Water But I do not see how washing of his hands could cleanse him when the Man that had the Issue touched perhaps some other part of his Body Ver. 12. Verse 12 And the vessel of earth that he toucheth which hath the issue shall be broken c. That it might not be imployed hereafter to any use See XI 33. VI. 28. And every vessel of wood shall be rinsed in water Such Vessels were not broken but only well washed because they were not so easily made as the other and were of more value There are so many washings prescribed here and on other occasions that it is reasonable to believe there were not only at Jerusalem and in all other Cities but in every Village several bathing places contrived for these Legal Purifications that Men might without much labour be capable to fulfil these Precepts And one cannot but think that such frequent washings were enjoyned to admonish them how carefully they ought to preserve Purity of Heart and Life Ver. 13. Verse 13 And when he that hath an issue is cleansed of his issue It having ceased for some time Then he shall number to himself seven days for his cleansing That there might be sufficient proof made whether the Issue was stopt that is he was really cured And wash his clothes and bathe his flesh In the conclusion of the seventh day In running water i. e. Spring-water as we speak which was most pure River-water was the same which comes from Springs And shall be clean So that he might keep Company with his Neighbours but not have Communion with God at the Sanctuary till after the following Sacrifices were offered For if in the end of the seventh day after his washing the Flux returned again all this labour was lost and he was to stay seven days more as Maimonides observes in his Treatise on this Subject cap. 3. Ver. 14. Verse 14 And on the eighth day If he continued free from the Flux after his washing on the seventh day in the Evening He shall take to him two turtle doves or two young pigeons These were the Sacrifices appointed for the meaner sort of People who were not able to be at the charge of a Lamb or other Sacrifices of the Flock or Herd V. 7. XII 8. And perhaps the great trouble the Man had endured and given others while he laboured under this Disease might be considered so far as to put him to as little charge as might be for his Purification And come before the LORD unto the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation But not into the Court of the Israelites till his Sacrifices were offered Ver. 15. Verse 15 And the Priest shall offer them the one for a sin-sin-offering and the other for a burnt-offering As in the Case of a poor Leper XIV 31. who was bound also to offer a Trespass-offering of greater value And the Priest shall make an atonement for him before the LORD for his issue Perfectly restore him to partake of holy things of which he was debarred while he had his Issue And here it may be fit to observe That the greater part of all the Legal Defilements depended upon the Seat or Place of the Divine Majesty as the Author of Sepher Cosri speaks Pars III. sect 49. whose Presence there made their Country be called the Holy Land and was the ground of all these Injunctions about Cleanliness To which he thinks they have no Obligations at this day now that they live in an unclean Land i. e. among us Gentiles and want the Presence of the Divine Majesty among them Ver. 16. Verse 16 And if any mans seed of copulation Though the holy Writers speak very plainly of some things that we think it not so modest to name in that manner yet it is observable on the other hand that in things of the same nature they use Circumlocutions to express them which we stick not to speak of in blunter words As when they say The water of the feet meaning Urin and call going to Stool Vncovering of the feet which shows that it is nothing but the vast difference of Times and Places which makes that Language seem uncivil to us that was not so to them and on the contrary made them very cautious in their Expressions where we think it unnecessary Go out from him Involuntarily in his sleep or otherwise which the Hebrews call keri i. e. accidental Then he shall wash all his flesh with water and be unclean until the even This was one of the smallest Legal Pollutions from which they were soon cleansed without any Sacrifice And which some of them think did not oblige them to wash unless they intended to go to the Sanctuary But though that Opinion be true yet this Rite had such a respect to the Sanctuary that now they have none they do not think themselves bound to use it on such occasions Ver. 17. Verse 17 And every garment and every skin c. These things were made so unclean by such Accidents that they might not be used the next day nor till they were washed Ver. 18. Verse 18 The woman also with whom man shall lie with seed of copulation It is no wonder the holy Writers speak so plainly of these Matters being Men of great simplicity free from all wantonness commonly far advanced in years among whom Marriage and a numerous Issue were accounted the greatest Blessings and therefore coveted by all and renounced by none They shall both bathe themselves in water c. There is no sort of Pollution in the act of Marriage which is of God's own Institution but what this Law made and the Law made it as Theodoret thinks that the trouble of such constant
Verse 5 And he shall take of the Congregation of the Children of Israel The former Sacrifices v. 3. were for himself these for all the People Two Kids of the Goats for a Sin-offering These two Goats made but one Sin-offering which is described more largely and particularly v. 8 9 10. The former perhaps which was sacrificed to the LORD was to procure those good things which they had forfeited by their sins and the other the Scape-goat as we translate it to avert those Evils which they had deserved For the name that is commonly given it by the Greeks signifies its power to turn away Punishments Or the simple reason of it might be that the Israelites by this double Sacrifice for both were presented before the LORD might be the more fully satisfied of the Expiation of their Sins There is the like example before of two Birds appointed for the cleansing of a Leper's House one of which only was killed the other let fly away but both of them are said to cleanse the House and to be for atonement XIV 49 52 53. In which some of the ancient Fathers thought they saw a notable Type of our LORD Christ Whose Sacrifice as it was prefigured by all the Legal Sacrifices for the Paschal Lamb it self was a Type of him sacrificed for us 1 Corinth V. 7. so by this more especially on the Day of Expiation Which was of greater and more universal efficacy than all the rest and therefore represented him more fully than the other did Insomuch that these two Goats joyned in one Sacrifice may be thought to represent one Christ consisting of two Natures For since it was not possible as Theodoret expresses it to adumbrate both the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which was mortal and that which was immortal in Christ he commanded two to be brought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Goat which was offered in Sacrifice might prefigure the passible Nature of his Flesh and that which was let go might show the impassible Nature of his Divinity Quaest XXII in Levit. And St. Cyril Discourses to the same purpose in his ninth Book against Julian And one Ram for a Burnt-offering Which was no more than was appointed for Aaron himself v. 3. who herein is equalled with all the Princes of the People in whose name this Ram seems to have been offered Ver. 6. Verse 6 And Aaron shall offer his Bullock of the Sin-offering which is for himself Not by killing it which was done afterwards v. 11. but only by presenting it before God to be sacrificed which was done with a solemn Prayer wherein he beseeched God to be propitious unto him and his The form of it is set down in Massechet Joma cap. 3. sect 8. He laid his hand upon the head of the Bullock and said I have done amiss and been rebellious and sinned before thee I and my House I beseech thee now O LORD remit my Rebellion and my Sin which I have committed and my House c. And make an atonement for himself and for his house For his Family as I said v. 3. and for all the Priests who are called the House of Aaron CXV Psal 10 12. CXXXV 9. And I do not see why all the House of Levi should not also be understood For they are not comprehended under the name of the Congregation of the Children of Israel mentioned in the Verse before and therefore must be contained here under the name of the House of Aaron See I Numb 49. Ver. 7. Verse 7 And he shall take the two Goats Mentioned v. 5. which were to be of equal stature of the same colour and the same price as the Hebrew Doctors say in Joma cap. 6. both designed to the same end the Expiation of their Sins And present them before the LORD at the door of the Tabernacle c. All the sin-Sin-offerings which were made for the Congregation were presented either by the High-Priest or by the Elders IV. 15. and by them devoted to God to be sacrificed on his Altar For this presenting of the Goat is the same with his offering of the Bullock in the Verse foregoing in which was nothing else but his solemn Consecration of them as I said to be sacrificed According to which pattern our blessed LORD and Saviour a little before he suffered upon the Cross and made himself a Sacrifice for us voluntarily offered himself to die for our sins Which is the meaning of those words of his XVII John 19. where praying for his Apostles he saith For their sakes I sanctifie my self that is offer my self to die as an Expiatory Sacrifice for them For that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes signifies as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dr. Owtram hath demonstrated Lib. II. de Sacrificiis cap. 3. And so St. Chrysostom here expounds these words I sanctifie my self by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I offer thee a Sacrifice or consecrate and devote my self to be sanctified And it is not an improbable Conjecture of another very learned Friend of mine now also with God Dr. Spencer that the appointing of two Goats to be both presented to God at the same time and with the same Rites was to preserve the Jews in a belief that there is but one principle of all things who both bestows good things and inflicts evil Contrary to the opinion of the Gentiles who made two Principles one good and the other bad which was the ancient belief of the Chaldaeans and other Eastern People and from them propagated to the Greeks and Romans Most of whose Sacrifices as another very learned Man of our own Country hath observed had respect to these two Principles to one of which they offered in the Morning and to the other at Night See Dr. Windet de Vita Functorum statu sect 3. where he observes that there are plain footsteps of this old Error at this day through all the East as far as China for there was an endeavour to infect Christianity with it by Manes the Persian in the Reign of the Emperor Aurelian nor was there any Heresie that spread so far as this Dotage did Ver. 8. Verse 8 And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two Goats The manner of it is described in the same Treatise Massechet Joma cap. 3. sect 9. The High-Priest went to the East-part of the Court on the North-side of the Altar having the Sagan his Vicar on his right hand and the head of the House of the Fathers on his left There stood two Goats with an Vrn or Box which they call CALPI the very same name which Lucian and the Scholiast upon Aristophanes give to the same thing as our learned Sheringham upon that Book and Bochart in his Hierozoicon have observed Into this Urn the two Lots were cast which were made of Box-wood as the Misna here says and in after times came to be of Gold But Maimonides in his Treatise on this Subject saith they might be made either of Wood or Stone
there But the Expiation of the High-Priest himself who was to make the Expiation of the Sanctuary preceded all the rest as is apparent from v. 11. Ver. 34. Verse 34 And this shall be an everlasting statute The repetition of this the third time See v. 29 31. shows of how great importance it was that this annual Solemnity should be observed Vnto you The High-Priests before-mentioned of whom he speaks in the Plural Number because none of them could continue always as I observed v. 32. but enjoyed the Office successively upon the death of their Predecessors To make an atonement for the Children of Israel for all their sins once a year This is only a repetition of what was said v. 30. that it should be incumbent on the High-Priest by a perpetual Obligation to make an Atonement for the Peoples sins on this day as it was incumbent on the People v. 29. to afflict their Souls upon this day And he did as the LORD commanded Moses The Service of this day was immediately performed by Aaron according to the fore-named order CHAP. XVII Ver. 1. Verse 1 AND the LORD spake unto Moses saying After he had ordered the great Anniversary Sacrifice in the foregoing Chapter he gives some Directions about other Sacrifices for which there would be occasion every day Ver. 2. Verse 2 Speak unto Aaron and his Sons and all the Children of Israel Who were all concerned in what follows and therefore this Command is directed to the whole house of Israel v. 3. to whom this was delivered it is likely by their Elders or else Moses himself went from Tribe to Tribe and spake to their several Families And say unto them This is the thing which the LORD hath commanded Enjoyned by a Special Law Ver. 3. Verse 3 Whatsoever man there be of the House of Israel that killeth an Ox or Lamb or Goat viz. For a Sacrifice or Offering as it follows v. 4. these being the only Creatures of the Herd and the Flock that were permitted to be brought to God's Altar There are those indeed who think Moses speaks of killing these Creatures for common use which it was lawful for them to do any where after they came to the Land of Canaan XII Deut. 15. but now they were not to kill them for their food unless they brought them to the door of the Tabernacle and there first sacrificed some part of them to the LORD before they tasted of them themselves By which their sacrificing to Daemons was prevented to which they were prone v. 7. and they also constantly feasted with God while they dwelt in the Wilderness But this is better founded upon XII Deut. 20 21. where it is supposed that they had thus done while they remained in the Wilderness and were so near to the House of God that they might easily bring thither every Beast they killed for ordinary use But they were dispensed withal as to this when they came into Canaan and could not possibly when they had a mind to eat Flesh go so far as to the Tabernacle or Temple which was many Miles from some of them Instead whereof they were bound to come at the three great Festivals and appear before God at his House wheresoever they dwelt In the Camp or that killeth it out of the Camp This seems to show that he doth not speak of killing these Beasts ad usum vescendi as St. Austin's words are for the use of eating for that they did not do out of the Camp but in their Tents but de Sacrificiis he speaks concerning Sacrifices For he prohibits as he goes on private Sacrifices lest every Man should take upon him to be a Priest c. Ver. 4. Verse 4 And bringeth it not unto the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation to offer an offering unto the LORD In ancient time every Man had performed the Office of a Priest in his own Family But now that liberty is taken away because they had abused it to Idolatry and every Man was bound to bring his Sacrifice to the House of God where none but the Sons of Aaron could officiate and had the most sacred Obligations on them to offer only to the LORD The very Heathens themselves in future times found it necessary to enact the very same as appears by Plato in the latter end of his Tenth Book of Laws where he hath these memorable words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let this be a Law imposed absolutely upon all that no Man whatsoever have a sacred place in private Houses but when he hath a mind to offer Sacrifice let him go to the publick Temples and deliver his Sacrifice to the Priests whether Men or Women 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whose business it is to take care that these things be performed in an holy manner By which it appears that these were two established Principles of Religion in wise Mens minds to Sacrifice publickly and to bring their Sacrifices to the Priests who were to take care to offer them purely Unto which Moses adds one thing more that their publick Sacrifices should be offered only at one place which was a most efficacious preservative from all strange Worship nothing being done but under the Eye of the Ministers of Religion and the Governours of the People Insomuch that St. Chrysostom as our learned Dr. Spencer observes Lib. I. de Rit Leg. Hebr. L. I. cap. 4. sect 1. calls Jerusalem which was afterwards established to be this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a kind of bond or knot whereby the whole Nation were tied fast to the Judaical Religion Before the Tabernacle of the LORD Before the Divine Majesty which dwelt in the Tabernacle round about which they all inhabited and were so near it while they travelled in the Wilderness that as there was no trouble in bringing all their Sacrifices thither so they knew certainly whether to go And thus the Hebrew Doctors observe it was when they came into Canaan where while the Tabernacle was fixed in Shilo none might Sacrifice any where else But when it wandred uncertainly after Shilo was destroyed being sometimes in Mispeh sometimes at Gilgal and at Nob and Gibeon and the House of Obed-Edom they fancy it was lawful to Sacrifice in other places For so we find Samuel did 1. Sam. VII 9. IX 13. where he sacrificed in an high place XI 15. XVI 2. and David 2 Sam. XXIV 18. and Elias 1 Kings XVIII 23. But these may be thought extraordinary acts done by an immediate warrant from God for none of these Persons were Priests but Prophets guided by Divine Inspirations See Dr. Owtram Lib. I. de Sacrific cap. 2. Blood shall be imputed unto that man he hath shed blood He was to be punished as a Murderer that is die for it For to have Blood imputed to a Man in the Hebrew phrase or to be guilty of Blood is to be liable to have his Blood shed or to lose his Life Which as of old it was
the punishment of every one who killed another Man IX Gen. 6. so here he is condemned to die who sacrificed any where but at the Tabernacle And that man shall be cut off from among his people This not another punishment unless we suppose it relates to his Posterity and therefore the first word should be translated not and but for And the meaning either is that the Magistrate should pass the Sentance of Death upon him or God would destroy him himself The latter sense is most probable because he threatens v. 10. to execute Vengeance with his own hand upon him that was guilty of eating Blood It is thought indeed by some that cutting off doth not signifie death but as in other places of this Book cutting off is so evidently joyned with death that so little cannot be meant by it as depriving such Persons of the priviledges of God's People for instance when any offered his Children to Moloch XX. 2 3 4 5. or did not afflict his Soul on the Day of Atonement XXIII 29 30. so here in this place it most certainly signifies the putting him that was guilty of this Crime to death because he was to be punished as a Murderer Which severe Penalty was enacted in this case to preserve the Israelites from Idolatry For if they had been permitted to offer Sacrifice where they pleased they might easily have forsaken God by altering the Rites which he had ordained nay by offering to strange Gods particularly to the Daemons which in those days frequented the Fields and indeavoured to perswade the ignorant that they were Gods as seems to be intimated in the next Verse and v. 7. Ver. 5. Verse 5 To the end Or For this cause i. e. to avoid that heavy punishment before-mentioned That the Children of Israel may bring their Sacrifices Or Shall bring as the Vulgar Latin translates it regarding the sense more than the words Ideo Sacerdoti offerre debent c. Therefore they ought to bring to the Priest their Sacrifices c. Which they offer in the open field Where the Pagans erected their Altars to procure fruitfulness to their Fields Insomuch that Libanius saith in his Oration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Temples or Holy Places were the very Soul or Life of the Fields 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And that in them lay the hope of the Husbandmen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How old this Idolatry was we cannot certainly tell but it continued a long time among the Israelites as we learn from the Prophet Jeremiah XIII 27. and Hosea XV. 11. where he saith Their Altars were as heaps in the furrows of the field that is there were abundance of them notwithstanding this early prohibition given by Moses And among the Gentiles Festus tells us they offered Sacrifices to the terrestrial Gods in terra upon the very ground according to the Hebrew phrase here on the face of the field but to the infernal Gods in terra effossa in holes or pits digged in the Earth and to the caelestial in aedificiis à terra exaltatis in Buildings exalted above the Earth i. e. upon Altars which had their name from hence ab altitudine from their height as both he and Servius also tell us And every one knows that they delighted to set them in high places on the tops of Mountains and Hills especially where there were Groves and shady Trees under which they set them even in Valleys and in the High-ways Fields and Meadows For they were so fond of them that those who were against erecting of Temples to their Gods as Zeno was yet never sacrificed without Altars which they set in the open Air to signifie they believed he whom they worshipped could not be circumscribed Even that they may bring them unto the LORD Or They shall bring them even unto the LORD who had settled his Habitation at the Tabernacle and would be worshipped no where else with Sacrifices Vnto the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation unto the Priest Here seems to be another reason why they were not permitted to offer in the Field because God would have none but the Priests Men appointed by himself to attend for this purpose at his House to offer Sacrifices to him according to the Rites he had prescribed And offer them for peace-offerings unto the LORD Upon these words Nachmanides grounds the forenamed opinion That whilst the Jews continued in the Wilderness they ate no Meat at their own private Tables but what had been first offered to God at the Tabernacle Behold saith he God commanded that all which the Israelites did eat should be peace-Peace-offerings Which was afterwards altered when they came to Canaan and lived remote from the House of God And such a Custom prevailed among the Gentiles who would not sit down to eat at their Tables till they had offered Bread and Wine unto their Gods Thus it was among the Chaldees as appears from I Daniel 8. But then they had many Altars every where even in their own private Houses Whereas here in the Wilderness there was but one Altar which could not contain all the Fat that was to be burnt on it every day if we suppose the Israelites to have commonly killed Beasts for their own eating It seems to be the truer opinion that they seldom or never did that while they were in the Wilderness but all the Beasts they killed were for Sacrifice of which Moses here speaks So R. Levi Barcelonita Praecept CLXXXVII and other Jewish Doctors they are here forbidden to offer a Sacrifice to God any where without the Tabernacle He mentions indeed only Peace-offerings but the reason is because they were most common being offered not only for all the Mercies they had received but for all they desired to obtain from God as Abarbanel observes upon the VIIth Chapter of this Book where the several sorts of them are mentioned Men were more forward also to bring these Offerings than any other because they were to have their share of them and feast upon them Ver. 6. Verse 6 And the Priest shall sprinkle the blood upon the Altar of the LORD at the door of the Tabernacle This depends upon the foregoing command of offering all their Sacrifices at the Tabernacle that so the Blood might be sprinkled upon the Altar and poured out at the bottom of it as is required in other places of this Book and not kept together in a Vessel or a hole in the Ground As the manner of the ancient Idolatry was when they offered their Sacrifices in the Field and sate about this Blood and feasted upon the Flesh of their Sacrifice So Maimonides saith the Custom of the Zabij was More Nevoch P. III. cap. 46. And burn the fat So the manner was in all Sacrifices which is said also to be for a sweet savour unto the LORD See I. 8 9. III. 3 5. IV. 35 c. Ver. 7. Verse 7 And they shall no more It seems by this they had been guilty
of other Idolatrous Practises besides that of worshipping the Golden Calf XXXII Exod. And so much is expressed XXXII Deut. 17. And it was a sin of which their Fathers had been long guilty especially in Egypt XXIV Josh 14. XX Ezek. 7. XXIII 2 3. which they had not left but continued in the Wilderness V Amos 25. Offer their Sacrifices unto Devils These words show the reason why God commands them under such a heavy Penalty to offer only in one place at the Tabernacle because while they sacrificed in the open Fields they had been in danger to be seduced by Daemons who were wont to frequent those places especially in Deserts and present themselves to ignorant People as if they were Gods and intice their Devotion towards them Which Daemons or Evil Spirits appeared it is likely in the form of Goats and therefore are here called Seirim which properly signifies Goats And hath made some imagine that they really sacrificed to these Creatures as some of the Egyptians did who held Goats to be sacred Animals So Diodorus tells us Lib. II. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. they deified a Goat upon the same account that the Greeks worshipped Priapus Herodotus in his Euterpe cap. 46. saith the same of the Mendesij who he saith worshipped the Males more than the Females And many other Authors mentioned by Bochartus in his Hierozoicon P. I. L. II. cap. 53. report the same But I question whether the Egyptians were guilty of such Idolatry in the days of Moses Nor is there more truth in their opinion who think the Israelites now worshipped Images in this form of Goats Which the LXX seem to have thought when they translated it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to vain things as Idols are called in Scripture And yet this very word Seirim is by the Greek Translators rendered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 XIII Isaiah 21. which we here follow only instead of Daemons translating it Devils whom the ancient Zabij worshipped they appearing to them in the form of Goats and this Custom was universally spread as Maimonides thinks in Moses his time which was the cause of this Precept More Nevoch P. III. cap. 46. And indeed nothing is more common in the Writings of the ancient Heathen than the mention of Fauns and Satyrs and Aegipanes whose shape below was that of a Goat And to this day in the solemn Conventions of Witches the chief Devil that presides in their Assemblies is said by all that have examined such matters to have the form of a Goat And our famous Country-man Alexander Hales in his Discourse upon the Scape-Goat which is in his Summa P. III. Q. 55. derives the reason of it from the frequent appearance of Daemons in this shape in the Wilderness as Mr. Selden observes in his Prolegomena to his Book de Diis Syris They that would see more of these Seirim may consult J. G. Vossius L. I. de Orig progr Idolol cap. 8. and Bochartus his Hierozoicon P. II. L. VI. cap. 7. There is one indeed Anton. Van Dale who hath lately endeavoured to explode all these Fancies as he esteems them of Daemons which he would have to be the meer invention of the ancient Chaldaeans and from them derived to other Nations But he will never be able to make any wise Man believe that the World was so sottish as to worship the Images of Goats which he takes to be meant by Seirim if there had not been an appearance of some thing in that shape which they accounted Divine After whom they have gone a whoring i. e. With whom they have committed Idolatry For this sin was justly called by the name of whoredom ever after they were solemnly contracted and espoused to God to be his peculiar People XIX Exod. 5. Which is the reason that he is said so often to be a jealous God particularly XX Exod. 5. highly incensed that is at their worshipping other Gods besides him For this and such like words are never used but concerning Idolatry which Ezekiel describes as the foulest Whoredom XVI 22. and particularly mentions this Whoredom with the Egyptians v. 26. and the Assyrians v. 28 c. This shall be a statute for ever unto them throughout all generations These words seem to me to determine the sense of the foregoing Precept to which they relate from v. 2 c. not to be that all the Meat they killed for their own Tables should be Peace-offerings for that all confess was not a statute for ever if it were one at all throughout all generations but only while they were in the Wilderness Ver. 8. Verse 8 And thou shalt say unto them whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel or of the strangers which sojourn among you These words also show he speaks in the foregoing of bringing all Sacrifices whatsoever to the Tabernacle the same Law which was given before to the Israelites being now extended to all Strangers that sojourned among them By whom he means all such as were Proselytes to the Jewish Religion So the LXX here translate it and they add the very same words to v. 3. where the house of Israel is only mentioned in the original Hebrew The only question is What sort of Proselytes are here intended And I take it he speaks of the Proselytes of Righteousness as the Jews call them who were Circumcised and thereby embraced the whole Religion of Moses And this I find is the general opinion though some few learned Men contend that any Stranger who had renounced Idolatry whom they called A Proselyte of the Gate might bring their Sacrifices to the Altar Which one can hardly allow though asserted by so great a Man as Grotius Lib. I. de Jure Belli Pacis cap. 16. because he speaks of the same Strangers here which are mentioned v. 10. where all such Strangers are forbidden to eat Blood Which plainly belongs to such Strangers as were become Jews by Circumcision for other Strangers might eat it as appears from XIV Deut. 21. where the Israelites are allowed to sell what died of it self to a Stranger that he might eat it if he pleased and such Creatures had their Blood in them That offereth a Burnt-offering or Sacrifice i. e. Any other Sacrifice besides Burnt-offerings viz. Sin-offerings or Trespass-offerings or Peace-offerings None of which were accepted but from such as were admitted into the Jewish Religion though the pious Gentiles the Jews say might bring Burnt-offerings Ver. 9. Verse 9 And bringeth it not to the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation to offer it unto the LORD As he ordered their peace-Peace-offerings to be v. 4 5. Shall be cut off from among his people This demonstrates that the foregoing Precept and this belong to the same matter being inforced with the same Penalty v. 4. And it also shows that the Strangers before-mentioned signifie such Gentiles as were Circumcised for otherwise they were not of the Body of the People of Israel from which they
Governours CHAP. XIX Ver. 1. Verse 1 AND the LORD spake unto Moses saying The following Precepts which contain in a manner all their Duty seem to have been delivered to Moses immediately after the former being in great part a Repetition of some principal things which had been already commanded Ver. 2. Verse 2 Speak unto all the Congregation of the Children of Israel It is uncertain whether he delivered these Precepts only to their Elders and Heads of their Tribes to be communicated by them to the People or at several times he called every Family of every Tribe and spake these words to them himself And say unto them Ye shall be holy for I the LORD your God am holy This very thing was said to them before with respect to several Meats which are forbidden them XI 44. See there And now is repeated with a peculiar respect as Maimonides thinks More Nevoch P. III. cap. 47. to the filthy Marriages and abominable Idolatries mentioned in the foregoing Chapter as it is repeated again in the next Chapter XX. 7 26. with respect to some other things It being a general reason why they should be separated from all other People by the observation of peculiar Laws which is the meaning of being holy because they were the Worshippers of him whose most excellent Nature transcended all other Beings not only in Purity but in all other Perfections Ver. 3. Verse 3 Ye shall fear every man his mother and his father This Duty is called Honour in the fifth Commandment XX Exod. 12. and the Father there put before the Mother which being here called fear and the Mother put before the Father it shows saith Maimonides that honour and fear are equally due to both without any difference And the proper Expressions of Fear and Reverence are according to those Doctors not to sit in their Seat nor to contradict them in any thing they say much less to cavil against them nor to call them by their proper names but to add the Title of Sir c. as we speak or the like And the Expressions of Honour are not to sit down in their Presence and to provide them with Necessaries if they fall into Poverty c. See Selden Lib. II. de Synedriis oap 13. p. 557 c. and R. Levi Barcelonita Praecept XXVII And keep my Sabbaths Obedience as well as Reverence is included in the word Fear but if Parents commanded them to break the Sabbath-day or to profane any other day consecrated to God's Service they were not to be obeyed I am the LORD your God I rested on the Sabbath-day who am your Soveraign and therefore have power to require you to rest on any other days Particularly on the great Day of Atonement XVI 31. when I am so gracious as to accept of an Expiation for all your sins This is repeated v. 30. and XXIII 3. Ver. 4. Verse 4 Turn ye not unto Idols Not so much as to look upon them no nor to think of them as R. Levi Barcelonita expounds it Praecept CCXXV. much less to enquire after what manner the Gentiles worshipped them which is expresly forbidden XII Deut. 30. for by this means they might be allured to Idolatry The word we here translate Idols is a word of contempt signifying a thing of nought Or as some of the Jews will have it this word Elilim is compounded of the Particle al signifying not and El i. e. God As much as to say which are not gods and therefore called in Scripture Vanities which can do neither good nor hurt Nor make to your selves molten gods This seems to have respect to the Golden Calf which they made to worship and is called a molten Calf XXXII Exod. 4. But all graven Images are no less forbidden for if to look towards an Idol was a sin much more was it to make an Image of any sort to worship it The Jews are something curious in their observations upon this Precept For in the Book Siphra they say that they might not make molten Gods for others much less for themselves Whence that saying He that makes to himself an Idol violates a double Precept first in making it and then in making it to himself See R. Levi before-mentioned Praecept CCXXVI I am the LORD your God The same reason is given in the foregoing Verse for the observation of their Sabbaths and that of the seventh day every Week was ordained in memory of the Creation of the World and consequently intended as a Preservative from Idolatry as I observed upon Exod. XX. 8. which perhaps makes these two Precepts be here put together But it is evident Moses doth not observe the order wherein these Precepts were first delivered but rather inverts it beginning with the fifth Commandment and so going back to the fourth and here to the two first Ver. 5. Verse 5 And if ye offer a Sacrifice of peace-offerings unto the LORD As they were to avoid all Idolatry so they were to be careful to perform the Service due to the true God in a right manner peace-Peace-offerings are only mentioned because they were the most common Sacrifices being of three sorts See VII 11 c. XVII 5. Ye shall offer it at your own will Either of the Herd or of the Flock Male or Female III. 1 6. Or rather as the Vulgar Latin and the LXX understand it they were to offer it so that it might be acceptable to the LORD according to the Rules prescribed in the seventh Chapter Ver. 6. Verse 6 It shall be eaten the same day ye offer it and on the morrow This shows he speaks particularly of those peace-Peace-offerings which were a Vow or a voluntary Offering VII 16. for Sacrifices of Thanksgiving might not be kept till the morrow but were to be eaten on the same day v. 15. of that Chapter See the reason of this XXIII Exod. 18. the latter end And if ought remain till the third day it shall be burnt with fire See VII 17. Ver. 7. Verse 7 And if it be eaten at all on the third day it is abominable See VII 18. It shall not be accepted See there This seems to justifie the sense which the Vulgar puts upon those words v. 5. which we translate according to thy will Ver. 8. Verse 8 Therefore every one that eateth it shall bear his iniquity See VII 18. Because he hath profaned the hallowed things of the LORD By keeping them till they were in danger to stink or to be corrupted That soul shall be cut off from his People By the Judges if the thing was known otherwise by the Hand of God Ver. 9. Verse 9 And when ye reap the harvest of your Land Which was a time of great joy when they offered its likely many Peace-offerings of that sort before-mentioned Thou shalt not wholly reap the corners of thy field But leave a sixtieth part as their wise Men have determined it and that in the extream part of the Field rather than any other place
the Father before the Mother with such like things he may consult Simeon de Muis in his Varia Sacra p. 356 c. Ver. 3. Verse 3 And for his sister a virgin I see no reason why it should be restrained to his whole Sister both by Fathers and Mothers side as some of the Hebrew Doctors would have it for that his half Sister by either of them was nigh unto him as it here follows it appears by the Law about incestuous Marriages XVIII 9. Which hath had no husband To take care of her Funeral which her Brother therefore though a Priest might It is commonly observed that there is no mention here of his Wife But Maimonides with great reason thinks it was lawful for him to mourn for her but it was needless to mention her who by the Law of God was dearer to him than Father or Mother And there is this Argument for it that Ezekiel who was a Priest is forbidden by a special command to mourn for his Wife which otherwise he would have done XXIV 16 c. Ver. 4. Verse 4 But he shall not defile himself being a chief man among his people But though he might defile himself for such very near Relations yet he might not for the greatest Man in the Nation who was not so near of kin to him This seems to me to be the easiest and the most natural sense of this Verse by adding the particle lamed which in the two foregoing Verses is put before Mother Father Son Daughter Brother and Sister to Baal i. e. chief man as we translate it nothing being more usual than to omit such a particle which yet must be understood when it hath been often before-mentioned And thus the Vulgar Latin understands it And the sense is the same if we take it as our Translation seems to intend it But he shall not desile himself for any other being a chief man c. As for the Marginal Translation I can see no ground for it and there must be a greater Supplement by adding for his wife which one cannot well think is here forbidden as I observed on the foregoing Verse They also who translate it A chief Ruler shall not defile himself c. have still less reason the whole Discourse in this place being concerning the Priests To profane himself He himself in Sacred Offices being the greatest Person would have been prophaned i. e. rendred a common Man if he had mourned for any but those whom Nature had very closely linkt him unto Ver. 5. Verse 5 They shall not make baldness upon their head neither shall they shave off the corners of their beard nor make any cuttings in their flesh Though they were allowed to mourn for some persons yet for none after this manner that is according to the Custom of certain Places in Chaldaea as Aben-Ezra glosses upon these words And he might have added also of the Egyptians among whose Ceremonies we find this in after times and it 's likely had been very ancient For Jul. Firmicus tells us in the beginning of his Book That in their Annual Lamentations of Osiris they were wont to shave their heads that they might bewail the miserable misfortune of their King by depriving themselves of the ornament of hair c. And he adds that they did tear their flesh and cut open the scars of their old wounds c. where Johan Wouver observes the same out of several other Authors And Plutarch in his Book of Superstition saith they generally used in mourning to be shaven whereas the Hebrews let their hair grow See X. 6. XIX 27. Ver. 6. Verse 6 They shall be holy unto their God Attend to their Office unto which they are peculiarly consecrated and not without great necessity be at any time unfitted for it And not profane the name of their God By doing as the common People did or rendring themselves uncapable to Minister unto the LORD as they were when they were any way defiled For the Offering of the LORD made by fire They attend upon his Altar where the burnt-Burnt-offerings Peace-offerings and all the rest were offered And the bread of their God do they offer The word And is not in the Hebrew and the sense will be clearer if it be left out The offering of the LORD made by fire being called The bread of their God i. e. his Meat or Food For the Altar was his Table and what was burnt thereon was in the Nature of his Provision which in the Scripture Language is comprehended under the name of Bread So Solomon Jarchi saith whatsoever may be eaten is called bread See III. 11. Thus Fruit is called Bread XI Jer. 19. and Milk XXVII Prov. 27. and Honey 1 Sam. XIV 28. And therefore no wonder the Sacrifices are here called by that name and by Malachi his Meat or Food III. 12. Which phrase is used as the Author of Sepher Cosri well observes to keep up the Notion that God dwelt gloriously and kept House among them Pars II. cap. 26. Ver. 7. Verse 7 They shall not take a wife that is a whore All incestuous Marriages were as much forbidden Priests as any other Men. But besides here are three sorts of Persons whom it was unlawful for a common Priest to marry though there was no Kindred between them The first is a Whore whereby the Hebrew Doctors understand not only one that was a common Prostitute but one that was not an Israelite or an Israelitish Woman with whom a Man had lain whom it was unlawful for her to marry Which comprehends not only all such as are forbidden in the XVIIIth Chapter of this Book but those also in XXIII Deut. 2 3. See Selden de Successionibus Lib. II. cap. 2. 3. and Vxor Hebraica Lib. I. cap. 7. Lib. III. cap. 23. Or profane A Woman was accounted so as he shows in the same place who was either descended from such a Person as is before-mentioned or who was born of such a Conjunction as is here forbidden to a Priest And there are those who think it may be understood of one that had been consecrated to a false Deity whom she served with the use of her Body which she exposed to the Worshippers of that Deity Who though she afterwards repented and became good yet a Priest was not to marry her no more than an ordinary Whore But the simplest meaning of these three seems to be that they should not marry one that had prostituted her Body or that had been any way vitiated though against her will or was of suspected Chastity or as it follows was devorced from her Husband Neither shall they take a Woman put away from her Husband For commonly Women were put away for some fault as Abarbanel notes and were presumed not to be such as a Priest should desire To the same purpose Procopius Gazaeus A Priest saith he should not only fly from manifest Evils as Fornication but decline whatsoever may blemish his Fame now
Hierozoicon P. II. Lib. V. cap. 9. But this spot did not make a Priest uncapable to minister as Selden observes in the place above-mentioned unless it was a little prominent which made the blemish more apparent Or be scurvy or scabbed One of these words signifies a dry scurf or scab the other a purulent Or hath his stones broken Is bursten or hath a rupture as some expound it The LXX translate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which Procopius Gazaeus understands an Hermophrodite Ver. 21. Verse 21 No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the Priest shall come nigh c. This seems to confirm what was observed before v. 17. that any other blemish besides these here particularly mentioned made a Man uncapable to officiate at the Altar And in the first place the Hebrew Doctors reckon five in the Ears besides the want of them An Example of which Josephus gives in the Story of Hyrcanus the High-Priest whose Ears Antigonus cut off that if he should return again he might not resume his Office Lib. I. de Bello Jud. cap. 11. He hath a blemish This general repetition is a farther confirmation that all apparent Blemishes of the same kind with these here particularly named excluded them from ministring at the Altar And there being some of them that were permanent or perpetual as they speak and others that were transient which remained but for a time no Man that had a Blemish though only of the latter sort was to minister at the Altar till it was gone He shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God i. e. The Offerings made by Fire before-mentioned which are here plainly represented as the Meat that was served up to his Table See v. 6. If any of them did presume to offer at the Altar there were different Effects of their Contumacy according to the different sorts of their Blemishes which the Hebrew Doctors divide into three Classes as I observed v. 17. If any Man having a Blemish of the first sort ministred it profaned the very Sacrifice which he offered and he was to be scourged The second sort did not vitiate the Sacrifice but the Priest was to undergo the forenamed punishment The third sort was so inconsiderable that neither of these Effects followed upon his ministring who was blemished by them as Mr. Selden observes Lib. II. de Success in Pontif. cap. 5. p. 234. Ver. 22. Verse 22 He shall eat of the bread of his God But though such a Priest might not offer any Sacrifice yet he might eat with his Brethren of that part of the Sacrifices which was given to them for their portion which no Man in his Uncleanness might do Therefore these natural Infirmities were not Legal Impurities but only Incapacities as we speak which disabled them for their Office Here again the Sacrifices are represented as the Provision made for the Divine Majesty See v. 6 21. Both of the most holy Such were the Meat-offerings II. 3. VI. 17. the Sin-offerings VI. 25 26. and the Trespass-offerings VII 1. See XIV 13. The Shew-bread also was a most holy thing and all such were to be eaten only by the Males of the Priests Family in the holy place XVIII Numb 9 10 11 c. And of the holy Such were the Wave-breast and the Heave-shoulder of the Peace-offerings VII 35. X. 14. and the First-fruits and the Tythes But though the Peace-offerings of particular Persons were among the less holy things yet the Peace-offerings of the whole Congregation were most holy See XXIII 20. Ver. 23. Verse 23 Only he shall not go in unto the vail He was not to enter into the Sanctuary to burn Incense or to trim the Lamps c. Nor come nigh unto the Altar No nor go to the Altar of Burnt-offering which was in the Court of the LORD's House but he was to sit in the Wood-room where he was imployed in picking out all the Wood which had any Worms in it that it might be laid aside and not carried to the Altar as Maimonides and others relate He had also another imployment See XIII 2. If any Man were so presumptuous or so forgetful as to minister notwithstanding the manifest Blemish which was upon him he fell under Censure and was punished according to the degree of his Fault as I observed before v. 21. out of Mr. Selden who hath in the place there mentioned handled this more accurately than I thought it needful for me to do That he profane not my Sanctuary That he might not make others think meanly of the Service of God and consequently of God himself who would have Men in their greatest perfection minister unto him to preserve in Peoples minds a sense of his most excellent Being unto whom they ministred For which reason all the foregoing Prohibitions were given against marrying such Persons as had been vitiated c. and against mourning for the dead that they might not profane the name of their God v. 6. by doing as vulgar People did or making themselves uncapable to minister unto God as they were when they were defiled And thus Maimonides discourses upon this Subject More Nevoch P. III. cap. 45. God commanded his Ministers should wear precious Apparel and that none should be admitted to the Ministry who had any defect in his Body nay they who were deformed and ill-favoured were excluded because the Vulgar do not judge according to Mens true worth or beauty which lies in the Soul but according to their outward appearance in the comliness of their Bodies and the richness of their Garments And therefore the end of all these things was that God's House might be had in due honour and reverence My Sanctuaries This word in the Plural Number relates to the two parts of the Sanctuary the Court where the Altar of Burnt-offering stood which was an holy place and that which was properly called the Sanctuary wherein the Altar of Incense was Into neither of which a Priest that had any Blemish might enter as was said before For I the LORD do sanctifie them I have set apart both those places for my Service and therefore no Man with a blemish shall be admitted into them to perform any holy Office there Yet they might come into the Court to eat with their Brethren of holy things but not in their Priestly Garments which it was not lawful for them to use Ver. 24. Verse 24 And Moses told it unto Aaron and to his Sons and unto all the Children of Israel They were all acquainted with these Laws because they were all concerned the Service of God should be administred acceptably unto him CHAP. XXII Ver. 1. Verse 1 AND the LORD spake unto Moses saying These Commands that follow were delivered at the same time with the foregoing belonging to the same matter For though the Priests who had a blemish might eat of the holy things yet he would have them know that neither they nor such as were unblemished
Vows i. e. they vowed a Sacrifice to God for they could not Sacrifice on Ship-board when he had brought them to a safe Port. And so Cicero speaks of certain Mariners who being tossed in a Tempest vowed if they gained their Haven Ei Deo qui ibi esset se vitulum immolaturos They would offer a Calf to the God of that place And Homer in like manner brings in the Mother of Telemachus vowing perfect Hecatombs unto all the Gods if she might obtain her desire Odyss XVII v. 59. Or a free-will-offering This also was a Peace-offering for obtaining Blessings not when they were in distress I suppose but in general to procure God's favour to them and theirs In Beeves or Sheep And likewise Goats for all these were allowed in Peace-offerings III. 1 6 12. It shall be perfect to be accepted That was accounted perfect which wanted none of its parts nor had any defect in any of them The Heathen themselves did not think any other would be accepted and therefore made a careful choice of their Sacrifices as appears by those words of Virgil Lib. IV. AEneid v. 57. Mactant lectas de more bidentes Which he calls elsewhere eximij singled out as most excellent Lib. IV. Georg. v. 550. Quatuor eximios praestanti corpore tauros And that they might be such there was probatio victimarum a proof made of Sacrifices as Pliny speaks Lib. VIII cap. 45. where he saith such as were lame or had one leg shorter than the other were rejected Which probation was to be made by those that brought the Sacrifices but if they did not do their duty the Priest upon examination refused to admit them to be offered There shall be no blemish therein This is an explication of what he means by perfect Which Solon who seems to have taken the Rites of Religion from Moses called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the explication of which word Hesychius after several other expressions concludes with this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which neither hath any part more or less than it should have Julius Pollux who reports this of Solon hath a great number of other words to express the perfection required in Sacrifices which were to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. I. cap. 1. some of which are of the same signification and serve only to show how compleat their Sacrifices were to be Ver. 22. Verse 22 Blind or broken c. In this and the following Verses he mentions XII blemishes which render any Beast unfit for Sacrifice And the first is blind under which the Hebrews comprehend that which the Latins call Cocles a Beast that hath but one eye Or broken In the Bones of the Thighs or the Legs Or maimed Most take it for that which the Latins call mutilum that which lacketh any part The LXX took it more particularly for that which had its Tongue cut out The Hebrew Doctors for that whose Eye-brows or Lips were slit or cut off Which is nearer to the Hebrew word charuts than the Vulgar which translates it only a Scar. Or having a wen. The Hebrews generally understand by the word jabbeleth that which the Latins call Verruca a Wart or hard Knob rising in the flesh which is better than the Vulgar who translates it papulas which properly signifies Pimples Pushes or Wheals But I think our Translation cannot be mended a Wen being a more manifest deformity and more common in Beasts than the other Or Scurvy This is that which the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Itch. Or scabbed Some take this word to signifie the same with the Latin impetigo i. e. a Ring-worm or Tetter which spreads in the skin with a dry Scab though others take it for that which they call Porrigo for which I know no English word unless it be the mangy The Hebrews take it for the Porrigo AEgyptiaca as Bochart observes a Scabby Disease of this kind frequent among the Egyptians Ye shall not offer these unto the LORD Not so much as present them to be offered in Sacrifice Nor make an offering by fire of them upon the Altar unto the LORD Much less burn them upon the Altar for the LORD will not accept such Sacrifices Ver. 23. Verse 23 Either a Bullock or a Lamb that hath any thing superfluous This word we had before which we translate superfluous XXI 18. but it properly signifies the inequality and disproportion that there is between those parts that are pairs as the Eyes or Legs and particularly when one of them exceeds its just bigness ex gr when one Leg is longer than it should be Or lacking in his parts This word signifies just the quite contrary to the other when one part is less and more contracted than it should be one Leg supposed shorter than ordinary So all the Hebrews understand these words particularly Onkelos and Jonathan That mayest thou offer for a free-will-offering A very learned Person of our own takes these words for an Exception to the foregoing general Rule that such defects as these two should not hinder the acceptation of a Beast for a Free-will-offering though not for a Vow And it must be acknowledged that is the most plain and simple sense But the Jews as he observes particularly R. Solomon Jarchi expound them otherwise and will not have this Offering to signifie the Sacrifice of such things at the Altar but the giving them to the Priest for some Sacred use to be sold for instance for the reparation of the Temple for which they were accepted See Dr. Owtram Lib. I. de Sacrificiis cap. 9. n. 2. But for a vow it shall not be accepted Free-will-offerings were much different from Vows there being no obligation upon them to offer the former as there was to offer the latter and a less perfect Creature would be accepted in the one case though not in the other Ver. 24. Verse 24 Ye shall not offer unto the LORD that which is bruised or crushed or broken or cut That is as the Hebrews interpret it and so do the LXX and the Vulgar any Beast whose Testicles were compressed or bruised c. For these four ways they used to castrate a Lamb for instance and make it a Wether and so they did with Kids and Calves as Bochart observes out of Aristotle and others in his Hierozoicon P. I. Lib. II. cap. 46. Neither shall you make any offering thereof in your land The word Offering is not in the Hebrew and this passage may be thus exactly translated Neither in your Land shall ye make or do So the LXX the sense of which the Vulgar expresses by adding the word this i.e. the fore-named castration either by compression or contusion or any other way For Josephus saith it was unlawful among them to geld any Creature which was prohibited to keep them from doing so with Men which they were taught to be abominable And these words suggested as much being thus translated Neither in your Land shall it be done
See Selden Lib. VII de Jure Nat. Gent. cap. 3. p. 799. Ver. 25. Verse 25 Neither from a strangers hand By bennechar the Son of a Stranger as it is in the Hebrew who is called XXV 47. a Stranger and Sojourner viz. a Gentile that dwelt among them is meant a pious Man of another Nation who had renounced Idolatry and abstained from Blood and observed the rest of the Precepts of the Sons of Noah as they called them but was not Circumcised which would have obliged him to the whole Law of Moses Such Persons being worshippers of the true God were permitted to bring him Sacrifices to be offered at his Altar See Grotius Lib. I. de Jure Belli Pacis cap. 1. sect 16. n. 3. Shall ye offer the bread of your God from any of these Some have taken these words as if no Sacrifice was to be accepted from a Gentile but only Money with which the Priest might buy a Sacrifice and offer it for him But this is confuted by v. 18. and here it is evident he only forbids them to accept of any Sacrifice which had the fore-named blemishes from a Gentile Who might think them not unacceptable because the Gentiles made no scruple to offer such as these last mentioned to their Gods though their Laws in some places were against it The Bread of your God The Hebrews understand hereby to be meant only Burnt-offerings which Maimonides saith were accepted from a Gentile even Burnt-offerings of Birds though he had not yet renounced Idolatry But they were not to accept from him Peace-offerings or Meat-offerings or Sacrifices for Sins of Ignorance IV. 27. or Trespass-offerings mentioned VI. 6. nor was a Burnt-offering to be accepted unless it was a Free-will-offering or a Vow as Mr Selden observes Lib. III. de Jure Nat. Gent. cap. 4. But if he brought such spontaneous Offerings as had the fore mentioned blemishes the Priest was to reject them though the Gentiles might say they were such as had been accepted by his Gods or else he was to be scourged So this Law is briefly expounded by the Jews when they reckon it up among their Precepts that a defective Sacrifice is not to be accepted no not from the hand of a Gentile as he observes in the same Book cap. 7. where he discourses at large on this Subject And it need not seem strange a Gentile should bring any such Sacrifices when their Laws as I observed before required a choice to be made for they were not so curious in their choice as the Hebrews but as Tertullian upbraids them sacrificed enecta tabidosa scabiosa Apolog. adv Gentes cap. 13. Which the better sort of People perhaps did not offer but the Vulgar did and the Priests made no scruple to accept them Because their corruption is in them and blemishes be in them The word corruption seems particularly to relate unto the fore-mentioned castration for it signifies such a Corruption as is the destruction of any Member See Bochart in his Hierozoicon p. 2. Lib. V. cap. 4. And blemishes relate to other defects which made them unacceptable Twelve of which as I said are here mentioned but the Hebrews look upon them only as Examples and Specimens of other the like defects which they make in all to be fifty as I observed before out of Selden Lib. II. de Success ad Pontific cap. 5. Maimonides gives us a Catalogue of them in his Treatise of Entrance into the Sanctuary cap. 7. but to make up that full number he is constrained to add these three which have no example among the XII here mentioned viz. such as tremble by age or by some disease or are torn by wild Beasts Ver. 26. Verse 26 And the LORD spake unto Moses saying These Laws following being of the same nature were in all likelyhood delivered at the same time with the foregoing Ver. 27. Verse 27 And when a Bullock or Sheep or Goat is brought forth These were the only Beasts that were allowed to be sacrificed v. 19. Then it shall be seven days under the dam and from the eighth day and thenceforth it shall be accepted for an offering c. They were not fit for Food when they were not seven days old and therefore not for Sacrifice which was the Bread or Food of God as it is called v. 25. But this hath been sufficiently explained before XXII Exod. 30. I shall only add that I have since observed that P. Cunaeus hath briefly expressed the sense of Maimonides which I there represented Lib. III. de Republ. Hebraeor cap. 5. and that the Gentiles were so far from offering Creatures so young that they thought them fittest for Sacrifice when they were two years old as appears from the words of Virgil before-mentioned Mactant lactas de more bidentes where Servius saith that bidentes were so called because they were biennes two years of age for it was not lawful to Sacrifice those that were younger nor those that were older Ver. 28. Verse 28 And whether it be Cow or Ewe ye shall not kill it and her young both in one day Lest the young one saith Maimonides should happen to be killed before the Dam which would have given the greatest grief to her More Nevoch P. III. cap. 48. Any thing that lookt like Cruelty therefore was by this Law banished from among them for they might not so much as kill both the Young and the Dam on the same day to offer them to God himself of which he is here speaking Ver. 29. Verse 29 And when ye will offer a Sacrifice of Thanksgiving unto the LORD He had mentioned free-will-Free-will-offerings and Vows before v. 21. and now briefly touches upon the third sort of Peace-offerings See VII 15 16. Offer it at your own will Male or Female of the Herd or of the Flock III. 1 7 12. Or the meaning may be as hath been often said He shall offer it in such a manner as that it be accepted See I. 3. Ver. 30. Verse 30 On the same day it shall be eaten c. See VII 15. Ver. 31. Verse 31 Therefore shall ye keep my Commandments and do them c. Because he had said before v. 30. and now repeats it again in the conclusion of this Verse I am the LORD To whom they owed obedience especially when he required they should reverently use all holy things Ver. 32. Verse 32 Neither shall ye profane my holy Name This may refer either to what goes before that they should not make him and his Service contemptible by offering such things as were defective c. or be taken as a Precept by it self And then the Name of God was profaned three ways as Mr. Selden observes besides the most grievous of all by Blasphemy Either when a Man for fear of death violated the Divine Law or when he contemptuously and wantonly broke any Precept or when a Man of great note for Knowledge and Piety gave a Scandal to others
Of new Corn made into Loaves as it follows in the next Verse which was the First-fruits of Wheat-harvest as the place before-mentioned tells us XXXIV Exod. 22. This day the Samaritans take to have been the first day of the Week after the very Letter of this Law which is thus made out by the great Primate of Ireland Our blessed LORD being slain at the Feast of the Passover the whole Sabbath following which was the first day of Unleavened Bread he rested in his Grave The next day after that Sabbath the Sheaf or Omer of the First-fruits of the Barley-harvest was offered to the LORD when Christ rose from the dead and became the First-fruits of them that slept From this day was the account taken of the seven Sabbaths or Weeks and upon the morrow after the Seventh that is upon our Lord's Day was celebrated the Feast of Weeks which is called the day of the First-fruits XXVIII Numb 26. because then were offered the First-fruits of their second or Wheat-Harvest and therefore called the Feast of 〈◊〉 XXIII Exod. 16. because then was the principal and the Conclusion of the whole Harvest of the year Upon which day the Apostles having themselves received the First-fruits of the Spirit begat three thousand Souls through the Word of Truth and presented them as the First-fruits of the Christian Church unto God and unto the Lamb. Now the matter being so ordered by God that in the observation of the Feast of Weeks the Seventh day of the Week the Jewish Sabbath was purposely passed over and that great Solemnity kept upon the first day of the Week no wonder the Christian Church hath appropriated that day instead of the Seventh for the Service of God Ver. 17. Verse 17 Ye shall bring out of your habitations These Oblations seem to have been offered at a common charge in the name of the whole Nation which is the reason of this phrase Out of your habitations For to affirm as some do that two Loaves were to be brought out of every House or at least out of every Town is absurd for they may as well say seven Lambs as it follows which were offered with this Bread were to be furnished in like manner out of every Family or Town Two Wave-loaves of two Tenth-deals A double proportion as before v. 13. which was presented to God the LORD of the whole World by waving them to all quarters Each Loaf did not contain two Tenth-deals but there was one in each Loaf They shall be of fine flour Of Wheat They shall be baken with leaven And therefore were not burnt upon the Altar for that was unlawful II Lev. 11 12. but wholly given to the Priests Whence it was as the Jews observe that the Bread accompanying their Peace-offerings of Thanksgiving were leavened VII 13. and not burnt on the Altar but intirely given to the Priests the Servants of God who attended at his Altar that they might Feast together with him They are the first-fruits unto the LORD Other First-fruits are mentioned v. 10. but these were the principal being the First-fruits of Wheat-harvest which with all the rest are exactly enumerated by Nehemiah X. 35 36 37. And that place of Pliny mentioned v. 14. seems to prove that the Heathen offered both the first of their Fruits before they brought them out of their Fields and Vineyards and also the first of what was made of them after they were brought home Which they did partly out of gratitude to God to thank him for making the year fruitful and partly to pray him to grant fruitful Seasons for the future Ver. 18. Verse 18 And ye shall offer with the Bread seven Lambs without blemish c. This being a great day and Burnt-offerings being the noblest sort of Sacrifice purely in honour of God a greater number both of Lambs and other Creatures are required upon this Solemnity And one young Bullock and two Rams In XXVIII Numb 27. it is said Two young Bullocks and one Ram besides the seven Lambs Perhaps they were left to their liberty either to bring one young Bullock and two Rams or one Ram and two young Bullocks Or else those mentioned in Numbers were distinct Sacrifices besides those here mentioned and so Josephus saith Lib. III. Antiq. cap. 10. that there were offered upon this day three young Bullocks two Rams it should be three Rams and fourteen Lambs All which were offered besides the Morning and Evening Sacrifice of every day They shall be a Burnt-offering to the LORD with their Meat-offering c. There being all sorts of Sacrifices prescribed for the great Solemnity of this Day he mentions the Burnt-offering in the first place because it was the principal and offered next to the two Loaves Ver. 19. Verse 19 Then shall ye Sacrifice one Kid of the Goats for a Sin-offering Next followed the Sin-offering Which for a particular sin of the Congregation was a Bullock 18.14 but for the sins of the Nation in general only a Kid of the Goats For as Maimonides observes More Nevoch P. III. cap. 46. the more grievous the Sin was the viler the Sacrifice there being no greater Sin than Idolatry nor viler Sacrifice than a She-goat and yet this was the Expiation of that Sin as they interpret IV. 27. XV Numb 17. And two Lambs of the first year for a Sacrifice of Peace-offerings Double the number to what was commonly offered For this being an high day all sorts of Sacrifices as I said before were offered Burnt-offerings Sin-offerings and Peace-offerings upon it and in greater proportions except the Sin-offering then on other days And these were the only Peace-offerings of the whole Congregation of Israel offered only at this one time of the year and never else Ver. 20. Verse 20 And the Priest shall wave them with the Bread of the First-fruits for a Wave-offering before the LORD These Sacrifices with the Trespass-offering for a Leper XIV 12 24. were the only Offerings that were waved about towards all the corners of the World So Abarbinel upon this place The waving was performed by the Priest who reached them out upward and downward this way and that way towards the six quarters of the World to show that the Earth is the LORD's and the fulness thereof Or as R. Levi ben Gersom speaks that they might understand the Providence of God is every where above and beneath in every corner of the World With the two Lambs This seems to signifie the forenamed Burnt-offering and Sin-offering were thus waved as well as these Peace-offerings That is some part of them all in the name of the rest for the Priest could not wave the whole Body of them they were so heavy They shall be holy to the LORD for the Priest Who had not only the Breast and the Shoulder as was usual but all the flesh of these peace-Peace-offerings their Blood being sprinkled and their Inwards burnt was given unto him to be eaten by the Males among the Priests
to preserve the memory of all the Miracles which God did in Egypt out of which he brought them at that time as the Feast of Tabernacles did to preserve the memory of the Signs and Wonders he did in the Wilderness where he afforded them his Divine Protection under a glorious Cloud and preserved them without any Houses both in the cold of Winter and heat of Summer In short there are two ends mentioned in this Chapter of the Institution of this Festival one to give thanks for the Fruits of the Earth which were then gathered v. 39. another and the principal in a grateful remembrance that they dwelt in Booths forty years and were brought into better Habitations when they came to Canaan v. 42 43. Ver. 35. Verse 35 And on the first day shall be an holy Convocation c. It was to be observed as the day of Pentecost v. 21. And they every one carried in their hands the Bough of some goodly Tree as the Hebrews understand the first words of v. 40. Josephus describing this Festivity Lib. III. Antiq. cap. 10. mentions in the first place Boughs of Myrtle Ver. 36. Verse 36 Seven days ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD The peculiar Sacrifices with their meat-Meat-offerings which were to be offered on these seven days are distinctly set down in XXIX Numb from the thirteenth Verse to the end Where it will be most proper to consider them On the eighth day shall be an holy Convocation unto you See v. 4. And ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD A Burnt-offering with a Meat-offering attending upon it according to the appointment in XXIX Numb 36 37. It is a solemn Assembly This is a new word which is not used hitherto concerning any of the Feasts here mentioned signifying as we translate it in the Margin a day of restraint or rather a closing or concluding day for then the Solemnity ended And so Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Conclusion of the Feasts Whence the last day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread is also called by this Name of Atzereth XVI Deut. 8. And so is the Feast of Pentecost which was kept in the end of seven Weeks called by Josephus by the same name of Asartha Lib. III. Antiq. cap. 10. This therefore as it was the last so it was the great day of the Feast as St. John calls it VII 37. On which day they read the last Section of the Law and so concluded the reading of the whole five Books of Moses And thence any great Solemnity is called by this name of Atzereth 2 Kings X. 20. I Joel 14. This seems to me to be a far better account of this word then that which the Jews commonly give who render it a day of detention because saith Abarbanel they were bound to detain the Feast to this day whereas no other Feast continued more then seven days staying at Jerusalem till it was over Whence this day seems to him to be to the Feast of Tabernacles as the Day of Pentecost was to the Passover For as they were bound to count seven Weeks from that time and then make this fiftieth day a Feast so they are here commanded after the seven days of the Feast of Tabernacles to stay and feast one day more Others of them as R. Solomon Jarchi say this was as if a Man having been entertained by his Friend seven days should to express greater kindness to him be detained one day more And ye shall do no servile work therein But spend their time in Feasting Mirth and Rejoycing with thankful Acknowledgments of God's Benefits to them See v. 7 8. Ver. 37. Verse 37 These are the feasts or Assemblies of the LORD which ye shall proclaim to be holy Convocations This was the Preface to them v. 4. and now is the Conclusion to make them the more observed To offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD a Burnt-offering and a Meat-offering and a Sacrifice c. These Offerings are particularly set down as hath been noted all along in the XXVIII and XXIXth of Numbers And by a Sacrifice seems here to be meant a Sin-offering which is ordered throughout those two Chapters together with Burnt-offerings upon all these Festivals Ver. 38. Verse 38 Besides the Sabbaths of the LORD i. e. Beside the Sacrifices appointed upon all the Sabbaths in the year which were not to be omitted if any of the Feasts here mentioned fell upon the seventh day of the Week And beside your gifts Most understand by Gifts such Presents as Men made to God beyond their First-fruits and Tenths But it may be thought only a general word including the two particulars which follow Vows and Free-will-offerings Ver. 39. Verse 39 Also in the fifteenth day of the seventh month when ye have gathered in the fruit of the Land c. Here is no new injunction in this Verse but only an inforcement of what was said before the very same days being appointed to be observed with those named v. 24. Therefore the Hebrew Particle Ak should not have been translated also but surely or certainly or truly as we translate it in other places particularly XXIX Gen. 14. Surely thou art my bone and my flesh LXXIII Psal 1. Truly God is good to Israel II Lament 16. Certainly this is the day that we looked for When ye have gathered in the fruit of the Land These words give a reason of the repetition of the Command because there was something more designed in this Festival than meerly the remembrance of their Condition in the Wilderness which was to express their Thankfulness to God for their desired Harvest which they had now gathered For which cause besides the seven days which were in Commemoration of their dwelling in Tents in the Wilderness there was an eighth added to acknowledge his Mercy of receiving the Fruits of the Earth Ye shall keep a Feast unto the LORD seven days These were the Feasts of Tabernacles which lasted all these seven days On the first day shall be a Sabbath See v. 35. And on the eighth day shall be a Sabbath In the institution of the Feast of Unleavened Bread it is said in the seventh day is an holy Convocation ye shall do no servile work therein i. e. it shall be a Sabbath v. 8. but here the eighth day hath that honour put upon it not the seventh being added to the Festival for a peculiar reason and therefore to be observed in a very solemn manner For the Feast of Tabernacles fell in the time of Vintage when the Fruits of the Earth were in a manner all gathered XVI Deut. 13. From whence it is called by the name of the Feast of Ingatherings XXIII Exod. 16. not because the whole Feast was celebrated on this account but because a principal part of it was kept on this score viz. the eighth day as the other seven days were in memory of their dwelling in Tents But that the eighth
together the other And ye shall rejoyce before the LORD your God seven days These were the seven days of the Feast of Tabernacles as I noted before which were spent in Feasting and other tokens of Joy with Thanks to God for his great Goodness who had brought them out of the Wilderness where they had no Fig-trees Vines or Pomegranates into a Country which abounded with fruitful Trees of all sorts Which was the reason Maimonides thinks that Moses bids them take the Boughs of the most goodly Trees wherewith to build their Booths More Nevoch P. III. cap. 43. But of all the Joys at this Festival none was comparable to that of drawing and pouring out water concerning which the Talmudists have this noted saying He that never saw the rejoycing of drawing Water never saw rejoycing in all his life The manner of which is described out of the Jewish Writers by Dr. Lightfoot in his Temple Service Chap. 16. sect 4. And our blessed Saviour is thought to allude to it when in the last the great day of this Feast he cryed saying If any man thirst let him come unto me and drink c. out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water VII John 37 38. But I have not met with any one that gives a tollerable reason of this Custom at the Feast of Tabernacles Which I take to have been in memory of that Water which followed them all the time they were in the Wilderness without which they had perished and in thankfulness to God that he had brought them into a Land of Brooks of Water of Fountains and Depths that spring out of Valleys and Hills as well as into a Land of Vines and Fig-trees and Pomegranates c. as Moses speaks VIII Deut. 7 8. Ver. 41. Verse 41 And ye shall keep it a feast unto the LORD seven days in the year He repeats it again because it was of very great importance that they should keep in mind such a singular Benefit as this of their Preservation in the Wilderness It shall be a statute for ever in your generations For the end mentioned v. 43. Ye shall celebrate it in the seventh month They came out of Egypt in the first Month and then began to dwell in Tabernacles at Succoth XII Exod. 37. and from that place were conducted ever after under the Cloud XIII Exod. 20 21. Which being in that Month we call March some may think it had been most proper to have kept this Feast at that time of the year 〈◊〉 not in September To which the Jews answer That in March Summer began when it was usual for People to dwell in Booths as more refreshing than Houses So that if they had kept this Feast then it would not have been known that they dwelt in Booths by a singular Command of God and in memory of a Divine Benefit but Men would have thought the season of the year led them to it Therefore God appointed it in the seventh Month which is a time of Cold and Rain when Men commonly left their Tabernacles and betook themselves to their Houses that it might appear they did not go out of their Houses into Booths for their own pleasure or from common Custom but by the Divine Precept in memory of a marvellous Benefit Yet the fifteenth day of this Month was appointed for the beginning of this Feast because it was upon the fifteenth day of the first Month that they marcht out of Egypt to Succoth Ver. 42. Ye shall dwell in Booths seven days They left their Houses for seven days and went into the Fields and pitcht their Tents there or on their House tops or in their Court-yards as we read in VIII Nehem. 17. All that are Israelites born shall dwell in Booths Sick People were excepted and the Rabbins also freed Women and little Children from this Obligation If the Rain likewise proved so great that they could not live there dry and the Cold so intense that it endangered their Healths they might all return to their Houses Ver. 43. Verse 43 That your generations may know that I made the Children of Israel to dwell in booths This expresses the end and intention of this Feast which was to preserve a memory in future Ages of the Goodness of God to their Fore-fathers in affording them his Divine Protection which overshadowed them â—â—d was a covering to them when they had no Houses by that glorious Cloud which went before them to conduct them For all the forty years they were in the Wilderness it overspread them like a Tabernacle and defended them from the Injury of the Weather and wild Beasts and all their Enemies they having no other shelter in that desolate place but only this And consequently this Feast was instituted to make them sensible how very happy they were in goodly Cities and fine painted Houses as Maimonides speaks in the place above-mentioned when they came to the good Land promised to their Fathers who wandered in an howling Wilderness without any certain dwelling place And another Feast was tack't to this on the eighth day on purpose to make them more sensible of the happy exchange of their Condition from a Wilderness into a Land of Corn and Wine and Oil which they had plentifully gathered Dr. Lightfoot in his Harmony of the Evangelists upon III Luke 21. hath another reason for the Observation of this Festival For which I can see no ground and therefore do not mention it but refer the Reader to the first Volume of his Works p. 477. When I brought them out of the Land of Egypt For the very first place where they rested after their first days march out of Egypt was called Succoth as I observed before that is Tabernacles because here they began to spread their Tents in which they lived ever after for forty years Nay in the very Land of Canaan there were some who preferred Tents before Houses as appears by that phrase we meet with so often when any Assembly or Army was dissolved They went every man to his Tent. And indeed it was the most ancient way of Living for Shepherds and such as fed Cattle as Moses observes IV Gen. 20. and therefore no wonder it lasted so long among the Israelites who originally were such People I am the LORD your God Whose Commands ought to be observed and whose Benefits ought to be remembred Ver. 44. Verse 44 And Moses declared unto the Children of Israel the Feasts of the LORD So he was commanded to do v. 2. they being concerned as much as Aaron and the Priests in keeping these holy Solemnities in honour of the LORD CHAP. XXIV Ver. 1. Verse 1 AND the LORD spake unto Moses saying Directions having been given after the setting up of the Tabernacle for the several sorts of Sacrifices that were to be offered there particularly upon the great Day of Atonement and Aaron and his Sons having been consecrated and care taken that none of their Posterity should Minister before God
but such only as were without blemish nor any other Sacrifices be offered but such as were every way perfect and only such Feasts observed as are mentioned in the foregoing Chapter he proceeds now to give order for the daily Service of God in the Sanctuary which was not yet settled till the Princes had all made their Offerings c. VII Numb 1 2 c. VIII 1. Ver. 2. Verse 2 Command the Children of Israel that they bring unto thee The daily Sacrifices were to be maintained at the publick Charge and so were the Incense and the Lamps and therefore it was proper to speak to all the People in whose name the Priests performed all these things to take care they should be furnished with them See XXX Exod. 13 c. Pure Oil-olive beaten for the light to cause the Lamps to burn continually All this hath been explained XXVII Exod. 20. where this order was first given and now is commanded to be put in execution It is not improbable that the Oil to make it more pure and free from all Dregs passed through two Strainers into the Lamps as Fortunatus Scacchus indeavours to make out Myrothec I. Elaiochris Sacr. 10. Ver. 3. Verse 3 Without the vail of the Testimony c. This is a short expression which in XXVII Exod. 21. is delivered more fully without the Vail which is before the Testimony that is before the Ark. Shall Aaron order it He or his Sons as it is explained in XXVII Exod. 21. From the evening unto the morning The Hebrew word Boker properly signifies that part of the Morning which is from break of day till Sun-rise and the other word Arvaim the Evening after Sun-set till it be dark Therefore very early in the Morning and late at Night the Priests were to look after the Lamps Before the LORD continually For the Lamps burnt on one side of the Sanctuary as the Table stood on the other side with the Shew-bread on it and both of them before the LORD i. e. before the Ark of the Testimony where the Divine Majesty dwelt XXV Exod. 30. XXVI 35. It shall be a statute for ever c. XXVII Exod. 21. Ver. 4. Verse 4 He shall order the Lamps upon the pure Candlestick The Candlestick was made of pure Gold XXV Exod. 31. XXXVII 17. and thence seems to be called the pure Candlestick XXXI Exod. 8. But here it is possible Moses may have respect to the making it clean every day before the Lamps were lighted Before the LORD continually See XXX Exod. 7 8. Ver. 5. Verse 5 And thou shalt take fine flour Of the best Wheat And bake twelve Cakes These are called the Bread of the Presence which we translate Shew-bread in the place now named XXV Exod. 30. where see what I have noted They were prepared by the Levites 1 Chron. 9.32 XXIII 29. and were in number XII to represent the Twelve Tribes of Israel as continually before God i. e. under the care of his gracious Providence Nor was this number diminished after the Apostacy of Ten Tribes from the Worship of God at the Tabernacle but still Twelve Cakes were set before the LORD because there were a remnant of true Israelites among them 1 Kings XXX 18. and this was a constant Testimony against those Apostates and served to turn them back to the right Worship of God at that place where they were assured they and their Sacrifices would be acceptable and no where else Which made Abijah mention this to Jeroboam and the Ten Tribes among other things that should induce them to repent of their forsaking God and his dwelling place where he tells them The Priests the. Sons of Aaron minister and the Levites wait on their business And they burn unto the LORD every morning and every evening Burnt-sacrifices and sweet Incense the Shew-bread also set they in order upon the pure Table and the Candlestick of Gold with the Lamps thereof to burn every evening c. See 2 Chron. XIII v. 9 10 11 c. Two tenth deals shall be in one Cake That is two Omers for an Omer was the tenth part of an Ephah XVI Exod. 36. Where we likewise read v. 22. that every Israelite while they were in the Wilderness gathered just his his quantity against every Sabbath On which day these Cakes being set upon God's Table as it here follows v. 8. Dr. Lightfoot thinks both the Measure and the Time were designed to put the Israelites in mind of their Sustenance in their Wilderness Ver. 6. Verse 6 And thou shalt set them in two rows c. One upon another as the Hebrew Writers expound it Who say also that they were set length-wise cross over the breadth of the Table and that they were ten hand-breadths long and five broad and seven fingers thick See Dr. Lightfoot's Temple Service Chap. 14. sect 5. Vpon the pure Table It was called pure because it was overlaid with pure Gold XXV Exod. 24. and we may be sure was kept very clean and bright Before the LORD Who dwelt in the most holy place before which the Bread was set Ver. 7. Verse 7 And thou shalt put pure Frankincense The best that could be got unmixed with any thing else And there was no better in the World than their neighbouring Countries afforded Vpon each row On the top of each row of Cakes there was set a golden Dish with an handful of Frankincense therein That it may be on the bread Or for the bread That is offered unto God instead of the Bread which was to be given to the Priests who waited on him at his Table for their portion For a memorial For an Acknowledgment of God and of his Soveraignty over them and to beseech him to be always gracious to them See Chap. 2. v. 2. and to represent also as Conradus Pellicanus understands it that God was ever mindful of his People and had a great love to them for the eyes of the LORD are over the righteous and his ears open to their prayers Even an offering made by fire unto the LORD The Frankincense being set upon the Bread they seem to be considered as one thing part of which was to be offered unto God and the rest to be given to his Ministers Now instead of the Bread which was the principal the Frankincense was burnt every Week unto the LORD when the Bread was eaten by the Priests Which Bread it is evident v. 9. is called one of the Offerings of the LORD made by fire because this Frankincense which stood upon it all the Week was burnt as an Oblation to him Ver. 8. Verse 8 Every Sabbath he shall set it in order before the LORD continually The Shew-bread was prepared the Evening before and then on the Sabbath four Priests went in to fetch away the old Loaves and Frankincense that had stood there all the Week before and other four followed after them to carry new ones and Frankincense in their stead For two of
them carried the two rows of Bread six Cakes apiece and the other two carried each of them a golden Dish in which the Frankincense was set upon the Bread See Dr. Lightfoot of the Temple Service Chap. 14. sect 5. Being taken from the Children of Israel At whose charge they were provided though prepared by the Levites See X Nehem. 32 33. By an everlasting Covenant By vertue of that Command which they had all agreed to observe which required the Shew-bread to be set before the LORD alway XXIV Exod. 3. XXV 30. Ver. 9. Verse 9 And it shall be Aaron 's and his sons Who as God's Servants eat of the Bread which came from his Table And they shall eat it in the holy place For the most holy things could be eaten no where else See VI. 26 29. For it is most holy unto him See Chap. II. of this Book v. 3. Of the offerings of the LORD made by fire It need not seem strange that this Bread which was not burnt upon the Altar as meat-Meat-offerings were should be reckoned among the Offerings made by fire for as the Altar where those Meat-offerings were burnt is called God's Table I Mal. 12. so this Table where the Shew-bread stood was really God's Altar Insomuch that the Bread which was set upon it before him was lookt upon as offered upon him and the Frankincense set upon the Bread as a part of it being really burnt it may be called an Offering made by fire Thus the Gentiles also as an excellent Person of our own hath observed thought Tables rightly dedicated unto their Gods to supply the place of Altars So Macrobius saith Lib. III. Saturnal cap. 11. it evidently appeared by Papyrian's Law That arae vicem praestare posse mensam dicatam a Table consecrated might serve instead of an Altar Of which he gives an instance in the Temple of Juno Populonia and then proceeds to give a reason for it because Altars and Tables eodem die quo aedes ipsae dedicari solent were wont to be dedicated on the same day with the Temples themselves From whence it was that a Table hoc ritu dedicata dedicated in this manner was of the same use in the Temple with an Altar See Dr. Owtram de Sacrificiis Lib. I. cap. 8. n. 7. By a perpetual statute As long as these Sacrifices lasted Ver. 10. Verse 10 And the son of an Israelitish woman whose father was an Egyptian went out among the Children of Israel In the Hebrew the words run thus And there went out the son of an Israelitish woman and he was the son of an Egyptian man in the midst of or among the Children of Israel Which last words signifie that though his Father was an Egyptian by birth yet he was become a Proselyte by Religion And was one of those it is probable who went along with the Israelites when God brought them out of Egypt XII Exod. 38. So R. Solomon Jarchi interprets this phrase Among the Children of Israel Hence saith he we learn that he was a Proselyte of Righteousness And Aben-Ezra to the same purpose He was received into the number of the Jews See a great many more in Mr. Selden Lib. II. de Synedriis cap. 1. numb 2. where he observes That it is the common Opinion of the Jews this Man was the Son of him whom Moses kill'd in Egypt II Exod. 12. And this son of the Israelitish woman and a man of Israel strove together in the Camp When God was delivering the foregoing Laws unto Moses this Case seems to have hapned And the Jews say the Controversie between these two was this The former looking upon himself as having a good right to it by his Mother came and endeavoured to set up a Tent among the Children of Dan in that place where their Tribe had pitched their Tents which was opposed by one of that Tribe who told him the right of his Mother would do him no service unless his Father had been an Israelite for the Law was II Numb 2. that every Man of the Children of Israel should pitch by his own Standard with the Ensign of their Father's House Which Law though given afterward yet they suppose was the Rule before by which this Man was condemned by those that heard the Cause to be in the wrong Ver. 11. Verse 11 And the Israelitish womans son blasphemed the Name of the LORD and cursed Sentence being given against him he uttered blasphemous words against God himself perhaps renounced the LORD and also cursed those Judges that had condemned him The Jews commonly think that this Blasphemy was his pronouncing the peculiar Name of God which he heard at Mount Sinai when the Law was given But this is a meer fancy for there were some reproachful words utter'd against God as well as against the Judges as appears from v. 15. And they themselves acknowledge that a Proselyte was guilty of death whether he cursed by the proper Name of God or any other as Mr. Selden shows Lib. II. de Jure Nat. Gent. cap. 12. Pellicanus thinks it probable that this Man mockt at the foregoing Laws which were delivered about the Worship of God and contemned God himself when he was told by whose Authority they were enacted And they brought him unto Moses If the occasion of their strife was such as the Jews imagine then Mr. Selden thinks it highly probable that the Cause had been heard and judged by some of the lesser Courts established by Jethro's advice XVIII Exod. 21 22. where the Blasphemy had been so plainly proved that he was convicted of it but they doubting about the Punishment of so high a Crime referred the consideration of that to Moses as the Supream Judge And his mothers name was Shelomith the daughter of Dibri of the Tribe of Dan. I see no reason of mentioning the name of the Woman from whom he was descended but that all might be satisfied of the Truth of this History Ver. 12. Verse 12 And they put him inward Committed him to Prison that he might be secured till his Punishment was declared That the mind of the LORD might be shewed them In the Hebrew the words are That it might be expounded to them viz. by Moses according to the mouth of the LORD that is as the LORD should declare to him And so Onkelos renders them Till the matter was expounded to them according to the sentance of the word of the LORD For it is noted here by a famous Commentator among the Jews as Mr. Selden observes in the place before mentioned Lib. II. de Synedr c. 1. that God was consulted about this matter because they did not know whether he was to die for this crime or whether his judgment was to be expected from the hand of Heaven or otherwise Whence Jarchi says they did not know whether he was guilty of death or not And so Theodoret Q. XXXIII in Lev. There was no Law as yet about this matter But there was
matter with that which went before it is likely was spoken at the same time And these words signifie that the LORD further spake unto Moses what concerned trespass-Trespass-offerings Ver. 2. If a soul sin and commit a trespass The same sort of expression is used in the beginning of this Law concerning the Offerings V. 15. Which some translate prevaricate or act insincerely Against the LORD The Soveraign of the World who was peculiarly affronted by the following Sins especially by swearing falsly which was calling him to bear witness to a lie And lie unto his neighbour in that which was delivered him to keep Deny the Trust which was committed to him and that when he was brought upon his Oath to deliver the Truth as appears by the next Verse For this is the instance of that sort of Oath which the Jews call The Oath about a thing deposited See V. 1. For there being no witness of what was done between two Friends or Neighbours who trusted one another in such matters but God alone they appealed unto him from whom Nothing could be hid And this Oath the Jews say was governed by another which they call The Oath of Testimony which a Man was not bound to give unless he were adjured to it by the Court of Judgment and so it was in the Oath about the things deposited he was not guilty who was adjured by private Persons and denied it but he that denied it before the Court. So they resolve in Halicah Olam Pars IV. cap. 2. Or in fellowship To carry on a common Trade in joynt-stock or as others understand it in any thing for which he gave his hand unto another for so the Hebrew words are putting of the hand as Contracts were oft-times made Which if a Man afterwards denied he fell under the guilt here mentioned And there is some reason to think that this is much of the same nature with the former because when he speaks of Restitution v. 4. this is not repeated And therefore it seems to be included in that which was deposited with another whether it were Money called here Pikkadon or any other Goods called Tesumah jad They that would see more Opinions about these words putting of the hand may consult Const l'Empereur in his Annotations on Bava kama cap. 9. sect 7. Or in a thing taken away by violence That is by Robbery or Stealth as the word gazel signifies For Theft not being punished among the Jews with death they tendred an Oath to those who were accused or suspected of it to clear themselves from the imputation XXII Exod. 11. Or hath deceived his neighbour Wrong'd him by false Accusation as the Hebrew word Hoschok seems to import Which St. Hierom always translates Calumny as the word Haschak he translates to calumniate It signifies also extortion and Rasi takes it for defrauding an Hireling of his Wages Ver. 3. Verse 3 Or have found that which was lost and lieth concerning it Deny that he found a thing lost which in truth came to his hand And sweareth falsly They put Men to their Oath in this case also when there was a just cause of suspicion as they did in matters of Theft In any of all these In any of these sorts of things as the Hebrew may be translated That a man doth Wherein one Man dealeth with another or which frequently happen as Grotius thinks this phrase signifies in his Annotations upon 1 Corinth X. 13. Sinning therein By these means contracting a guilt Ver. 4. Verse 4 Then it shall be because he hath sinned and is guilty The last words should rather be translated and acknowledges his guilt For so this word Ascham guilty ought to be expounded as I showed IV. 22 23. to make a clear sense of the Law there mentioned And it would otherwise be superfluous here for when a Man had sinned so grievously as the foregoing Verses suppose who could doubt of his guilt The true meaning therefore is when he hath sinned so the first words may be translated by committing any of those things fore-mentioned and acknowledges his guilt he shall restore that which he took away violently c. And this most plainly reconciles the contradiction that otherwise would be between this Law and that in XXII Exod. 1 7 9. Where a Man that stole an Ox is condemned to restore five Oxen and four Sheep for one and if he delivered Money to another to keep and it was stolen the Thief was to pay double whereas here one simple Restitution is exacted with the addition of a fifth part The reason is because in Exodus he speaks of those Thieves who were convicted by Witnesses in a Course of Law and then condemned to make such great Restitution but here of such as touched with a sense of their sin came voluntarily and acknowledged their Theft or other Crime of which no Body convicted them or at least confessed it freely when they were adjured and therefore were condemned to suffer a lesser Punishment and to expiate their Guilt by a Sacrifice See L'Empereur upon Bava kama cap. 7. sect 1. and cap. 9. sect 1 5 7. Where he observes very judiciously that this Interpretation is confirmed by V Numb 7. where the first words may be translated If they shall confess their sin that they have done c. And this seems to me more reasonable than the account which Maimonides gives of this matter in his More Nevochim P. III. c. 41. where expounding these words which he took violently of an open Robber he gives these Reasons why he was not punished so much as a Thief but restored only the Principal with a fifth part because Rapine happens seldom but Theft often for it cannot be committed so easily as Theft and is done openly and manifestly whereas Theft is committed more secretly so that a Man may be aware he imagines of a Robber and defend his Goods against him better than against a secret Thief Yet this is better than the account of R. Johannes f. Zachei mentioned by J. Coch upon the Gemara of the Sanhedrim cap. 7. p. 271. that a meer Thief fears Man more than God but a Robber fears both alike Ver. 5. Verse 5 Of all that about which he hath sworn falsly he shall even restore it in the principal The same numerical thing which he took away if it still remain in his possession unalter'd or else the just price of it as R. Levi Barzelonita expounds it Praecept CXXV And the Jews pretend to such scrupulosity in this matter that they say a Man who was to have a share in his Father's Estate from whom he had taken something by robbery was to restore it before the Division was made and not by detaining it to make his share greater than it ought to be See Bava kama cap. 9. sect 9. And shall add the fifth part more thereto The Jews have many subtilties about this as may be seen there sect 6 7. The plain sense is that he should