Leviticus 1:1–17

Observe here, 1. It is taken for granted that people would be inclined to bring offerings to the Lord. The very light of nature directs man, some way or other, to do honour to his Maker, and pay him homage as his Lord. Revealed religion supposes natural religion to be an ancient and early institution, since the fall had directed men to glorify God by sacrifice, which was an implicit acknowledgment of their having received all from God as creatures, and their having forfeited all to him as sinners. A conscience thoroughly convinced of dependence and guilt would be willing to come before God with thousands of rams, Mic 6:6, Mic 6:7. 2. Provision is made that men should not indulge their own fancies, nor become vain in their imaginations and inventions about their sacrifices, lest, while they pretended to honour God, they should really dishonour him, and do that which was unworthy of him. Every thing therefore is directed to be done with due decorum, by a certain rule, and so as that the sacrifices might be most significant both of the great sacrifice of atonement which Christ was to offer in the fulness of time and of the spiritual sacrifices of acknowledgment which believers should offer daily. 3. God gave those laws to Israel by Moses; nothing is more frequently repeated than this, The Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel. God could have spoken it to the children of Israel himself, as he did the ten commandments; but he chose to deliver it to them by Moses, because they had desired he would no more speak to them himself, and he had designed that Moses should, above all the prophets, be a type of Christ, by whom God would in these last days speak to us, Heb 1:2. By other prophets God sent messages to his people, but by Moses he gave them laws; and therefore he was fit to typify him to whom the Father has given all judgment. And, besides, the treasure of divine revelation was always to be put into earthen vessels, that our faith might be tried, and that the excellency of the power might be of God. 4. God spoke to him out of the tabernacle. As soon as ever the shechinah had taken possession of its new habitation, in token of the acceptance of what was done, God talked with Moses from the mercy-seat, while he attended without the veil, or rather at the door, hearing a voice only; and it is probable that he wrote what he heard at that time, to prevent any mistake, or a slip of memory, in the rehearsal of it. The tabernacle was set up to be a place of communion between God and Israel; there, where they performed their services to God, God revealed his will to them. Thus, by the word and by prayer, we now have fellowship with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ, Act 6:4. When we speak to God we must desire to hear from him, and reckon it a great favour that he is pleased to speak to us. The Lord called to Moses, not to come near (under that dispensation, even Moses must keep his distance), but to attend and hearken to what should be said. A letter less than ordinary in the Hebrew word for called, the Jewish critics tell us, intimates that God spoke in a still small voice. The moral law was given with terror from a burning mountain in thunder and lightning; but the remedial law of sacrifice was given more gently from a mercy-seat, because that was typical of the grace of the gospel, which is the ministration of life and peace.

And the Lord called unto Moses. In these seven chapters Moses will treat generally of the sacrifices. But since we read of many things here, the use of which has passed away, and others, the grounds of which I do not understand, I intend to content myself with a brief summary, from whence, however, the reader may fully perceive that whatever has been left to us relative to the legal sacrifices is even now profitable, provided we are not too curious. Let those who choose to hunt for allegories receive the praise they covet; my object is only to profit my readers, and it will suffice briefly to sum up what I think useful to be known. Although in this chapter burnt-offerings only are treated of, yet the rule which is laid down respecting them has a more extensive application, since Moses teaches what animals God would have offered to Him, so as that they may be acceptable, and also by whom and with what ceremonies they are to be offered. He enumerates three kinds, of the herd, of the flocks, and of fowls; for the case of the red heifer, from which the ashes of atonement were made, was different and peculiar; and here the question is as to the ordinary sacrifices, by which private individuals used either to atone for their sins or to testify their piety. He commands, therefore, that the cattle as well as the lambs and kids should be males, and also perfect and free from all blemish. We see, then, that only clean animals were chosen for the sacrifices, and again that all clean animals did not please God, but only domestic ones, such as allow themselves to be directed by the hand and will of men. For, though deer and roes are sometimes tamed, yet God did not admit them to His altar. This, then, was the first rule of obedience, that men should not offer promiscuously this or that victim, but bulls or bull-calves of their herds, and male lambs or kids of their flocks. Freedom from blemish is required for two reasons; for, since the sacrifices were types of Christ, it behooved that in all of them should be represented that complete perfection of His whereby His heavenly Father was to be propitiated; and, secondly, the Israelites were reminded that all uncleanness was repudiated by God lest his service should be polluted by their impurity. But whilst God exhorted them to study true sincerity, so he abundantly taught them that unless they directed their faith to Christ, whatsoever came from them would be rejected; for neither would the purity of a brute animal have satisfied Him if it had not represented something better. In the second place, it is prescribed that whosoever presented a burnt-offering should lay his hand on its head, after he had come near the door of the tabernacle. This ceremony was not only a sign of consecration, but also of its being an atonement, [249] since it was substituted for the man, as is expressed in the words of Moses, "And it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him." (Ver. 4.) There is not, then, the least doubt but that they transferred their guilt and whatever penalties they had deserved to the victims, in order that they might be reconciled to God. Now, since this promise could not have been at all delusive, it must be concluded that in the ancient sacrifices there was a price of satisfaction which should release them from guilt and blame in the judgment of God; yet still not as though these brute animals availed in themselves unto expiation, except in so far as they were testimonies of the grace to be manifested by Christ. Thus the ancients were reconciled to God in a sacramental manner by the victims, just as we are now cleansed through baptism. Hence it follows that these symbols were useful only as they were exercises unto faith and repentance, so that the sinner might learn to fear God's wrath, and to seek pardon in Christ.

If a man were rich and could afford it, it is supposed that he would bring his burnt-sacrifice, with which he designed to honour God, out of his herd of larger cattle. He that considers that God is the best that is will resolve to give him the best he has, else he gives him not the glory due unto his name. Now if a man determined to kill a bullock, not for an entertainment for his family and friends, but for a sacrifice to his God, these rules must be religiously observed: - 1. The beast to be offered must be a male, and without blemish, and the best he had in his pasture. Being designed purely for the honour of him that is infinitely perfect, it ought to be the most perfect in its kind. This signified the complete strength and purity that were in Christ the dying sacrifice, and the sincerity of heart and unblamableness of life that should be in Christians, who are presented to God as living sacrifices. But, literally, in Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female; nor is any natural blemish in the body a bar to our acceptance with God, but only the moral defects and deformities introduced by sin into the soul. 2. The owner must offer it voluntarily. What is done in religion, so as to please God, must be done by no other constraint than that of love. God accepts the willing people and the cheerful giver. Ainsworth and others read it, not as the principle, but as the end of offering: "Let him offer it for his favourable acceptation before the Lord. Let him propose this to himself as his end in bringing his sacrifice, and let his eye be fixed steadily upon that end - that he may be accepted of the Lord." Those only shall find acceptance who sincerely desire and design it in all their religious services, Co2 5:9. 3. It must be offered at the door of the tabernacle, where the brazen altar of burnt-offerings stood, which sanctified the gift, and not elsewhere. He must offer it at the door, as one unworthy to enter, and acknowledging that there is no admission for a sinner into covenant and communion with God, but by sacrifice; but he must offer it at the tabernacle of the congregation, in token of his communion with the whole church of Israel even in this personal service. 4. The offerer must put his hand upon the head of his offering, Lev 1:4. "He must put both his hands," say the Jewish doctors, "with all his might, between the horns of the beast," signifying thereby, (1.) The transfer of all his right to, and interest in, the beast, to God, actually, and by a manual delivery, resigning it to his service. (2.) An acknowledgment that he deserved to die, and would have been willing to die if God had required it, for the serving of his honour, and the obtaining of his favour. (3.) A dependence upon the sacrifice, as an instituted type of the great sacrifice on which the iniquity of us all was to be laid. The mystical signification of the sacrifices, and especially this rite, some think the apostle means by the doctrine of laying on of hands (Heb 6:2), which typified evangelical faith. The offerer's putting his hand on the head of the offering was to signify his desire and hope that it might be accepted from him to make atonement for him. Though the burnt-offerings had not respect to any particular sin, as the sin-offering had, yet they were to make atonement for sin in general; and he that laid his hand on the head of a burnt-offering was to confess that he had left undone what he ought to have done and had done that which he ought not to have done, and to pray that, though he deserved to die himself, the death of his sacrifice might be accepted for the expiating of his guilt. 5. The sacrifice was to be killed by the priests of Levites, before the Lord, that is, in a devout religious manner, and with an eye to God and his honour. This signified that our Lord Jesus was to make his soul, or life, an offering for sin. Messiah the prince must be cut off as a sacrifice, but not for himself, Dan 9:26. It signified also that in Christians, who are living sacrifices, the brutal part must be mortified or killed, the flesh crucified with its corrupt affections and lusts and all the appetites of the mere animal life. 6. The priests were to sprinkle the blood upon the altar (Lev 1:5); for, the blood being the life, it was this that made atonement for the soul. This signified the direct and actual regard which our Lord Jesus had to the satisfaction of his Father's justice, and the securing of his injured honour, in the shedding of his blood; he offered himself without spot to God. It also signified the pacifying and purifying of our consciences by the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ upon them by faith, Pe1 1:2; Heb 10:22. 7. The beast was to be flayed and decently cut up, and divided into its several joints or pieces, according to the art of the butcher; and then all the pieces, with the head and the fat (the legs and inwards being first washed), were to be burnt together upon the altar, Lev 1:6-9. "But to what purpose," would some say, "was this waste? Why should all this good meat, which might have been given to the poor, and have served their hungry families for food a great while, be burnt together to ashes?" So was the will of God; and it is not for us to object or to find fault with it. When it was burnt for the honour of God, in obedience to his command, and to signify spiritual blessings, it was really better bestowed, and better answered the end of its creation, than when it was used as food for man. We must never reckon that lost which is laid out for God. The burning of the sacrifice signified the sharp sufferings of Christ, and the devout affections with which, as a holy fire, Christians must offer up themselves their whole spirit, soul, and body, unto God. 8. This is said to be an offering of a sweet savour, or savour of rest, unto the Lord. The burning of flesh is unsavoury in itself; but this, as an act of obedience to a divine command, and a type of Christ, was well pleasing to God: he was reconciled to the offerer, and did himself take a complacency in that reconciliation. He rested, and was refreshed with these institutions of his grace, as, at first, with his works of creation (Exo 31:17), rejoicing therein, Psa 104:31. Christ's offering of himself to God is said to be of a sweet-smelling savour (Eph 5:2), and the spiritual sacrifices of Christians are said to be acceptable to God, through Christ, Pe1 2:5.

Here we have the laws concerning the burnt-offerings, which were of the flock or of the fowls. Those of the middle rank, that could not well afford to offer a bullock, would bring a sheep or a goat; and those that were not able to do that should be accepted of God if they brought a turtle-dove or a pigeon. For God, in his law and in his gospel, as well as in his providence, considers the poor. It is observable that those creatures were chosen for sacrifice which were most mild and gentle, harmless and inoffensive, to typify the innocence and meekness that were in Christ, and to teach the innocence and meekness that should be in Christians. Directions are here given, 1. Concerning the burnt-offerings of the flock, Lev 1:10. The method of managing these is much the same with that of the bullocks; only it is ordered here that the sacrifice should be killed on the side of the altar northward, which, though mentioned here only, was probably to be observed concerning the former, and other sacrifices. Perhaps on that side of the altar there was the largest vacant space, and room for the priests to turn them in. It was of old observed that fair weather comes out of the north, and that the north wind drives away rain; and by these sacrifices the storms of God's wrath are scattered, and the light of God's countenance is obtained, which is more pleasant than the brightest fairest weather. 2. Concerning those of the fowls. They must be either turtle-doves (and, if so, "they must be old turtles," say the Jews), or pigeons, and, if so, they must be young pigeons. What was most acceptable at men's tables must be brought to God's altar. In the offering of these fowls, (1.) The head must be wrung off, "quite off," say some; others think only pinched, so as to kill the bird, and yet leave the head hanging to the body. But it seems more likely that it was to be quite separated, for it was to be burnt first. (2.) The blood was to be wrung out at the side of the altar. (3.) The garbages with the feathers were to be thrown by upon the dunghill. (4.) The body was to be opened, sprinkled with salt, and then burnt upon the altar. "This sacrifice of birds," the Jews say, "was one of the most difficult services the priests had to do," to teach those that minister in holy things to be as solicitous for the salvation of the poor as for that of the rich, and that the services of the poor are as acceptable to God, if they come from an upright heart, as the services of the rich, for he accepts according to what a man hath, and not according to what he hath not, Co2 8:12. The poor man's turtle-doves, or young pigeons, are here said to be an offering of a sweet-smelling savour, as much as that of an ox or bullock that hath horns or hoofs. Yet, after all, to love God with all our heart, and to love our neighbour as ourselves, is better than all burnt-offerings and sacrifices, Mar 12:33.

And he shall kill the bullock. The ceremony of killing is subjoined, viz., that the priest should prepare the victim itself, and pour its blood upon the altar, for it was not allowable for a private person to kill the victim with his own hands, but what the priest did in their name was transferred to them. [250] But this is worth remarking, that although they brought the pledge of reconciliation from their home, yet that the ministers of expiation were to be sought elsewhere, since no one was competent for so illustrious an office, save he who was graced by the holy unction of God. It was, therefore, plainly manifested that all mortals are unworthy of coming near God to propitiate Him, and that the hands of all are in a manner polluted or profane except those which God himself has purged. For the honor of sacrificing came from nowhere else but from the grace of the Spirit, of which the external anointing was a pledge. We now understand how it was that individuals offered sacrifices to God, and yet that the priest alone performed this office. The altar was sprinkled with the blood, that the people might know that the blood poured from the victim did not fall on the ground, but was consecrated to God, and breathed, as it were, a sweet savor; just as now the blood of Christ appears before His face. I pass by the rest, since it does not seem worth while to enlarge on the third kind of offering, i.e., of the birds. Yet we must recollect that thus far Moses only speaks of the burnt-offerings, whose flesh was burned; for this was not the case with all, as we shall see hereafter. Although, then, it is twice said that "the priests shall lay the parts, the head and the fat," etc., we must not understand it as if he only commanded the fat and the head to be burned, but that nothing was to be left the skin. Some think that phdr pheder, [251] is a dissevered head, nor do I reject their opinion, provided we do not exclude the fat. Whatever was filthy in the victim, God would have to be washed, that it might not contaminate it. The question now arises why it was burned either wholly or partially. My own opinion is, that by the fire the efficacy of the Spirit is represented, on which all the profit of the sacrifices depends; for unless Christ had suffered in the Spirit, He would not have been a propitiatory sacrifice. Fire, then, was as the condiment which gave their true savor to the sacrifices, because the blood of Christ was to be consecrated by the Spirit, that it might cleanse us from all the stains of our sins. This God would have more fully represented in the burnt-offerings, yet no victim was offered of which some part was not consumed by fire. Footnotes: [249] Lat., "piaculum." Fr., "mais aussi de la malediction a cause du peche." [250] "It is interesting to notice here, (says Bonar, in loco,) that Outram, Witzius, and others, seem to have proved that in patriarchal ages every man might offer his own sacrifice. The patriarchal ages were taught that every man must take Christ for himself personally. In the Mosaic economy, however, this is altered; there is another truth to be shewn forth. Any one (2 Chronicles 30:17) might kill the animal -- any common Levite, or even the offerer himself -- for there may be many executioners of God's wrath. Earth and hell were used in executing the Father's purpose toward the Prince of Life. But there is only one appointed way for dispensing mercy, and therefore only priests must engage in that act that signified the bestowal of pardon." He appears, however, to be singular in his opinion that any but a Levite might kill the victim. [251] This word only occurs here, and in ver. 12, and chap. 8:20. S.M. says that the Jewish expositors declare it to mean that fat, or network of fat which is found upon the liver, and with which the severance (locus de-collationis) of the head was covered, when the head was put upon the fire. It is not easy to discover who may have said that it meant a dissevered head. -- W. "Some translate it (says Poole, in loco) the body, or the trunk of the body, (whence, perhaps, C.'s error.) So the ancient Hebrews quoted in Fagius; so Vatablus, Grotius, Malvenda, Mercerus in Bochart."

Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them--If the subject of communication were of a temporal nature, the Levites were excluded; but if it were a spiritual matter, all the tribes were comprehended under this name (Deu 27:12). If any man of you bring an offering unto the Lord--The directions given here relate solely to voluntary or freewill offerings--those rendered over and above such, as being of standing and universal obligation, could not be dispensed with or commuted for any other kind of offering (Exo 29:38; Lev 23:37; Num 28:3, Num. 28:11-27, &c.). bring your offering of the cattle, &c.--that is, those animals that were not only tame, innocent and gentle, but useful and adapted for food. This rule excluded horses, dogs, swine, camels, and asses, which were used in sacrifice by some heathen nations, beasts and birds of prey, as also hares and deers.

a burnt sacrifice--so called from its being wholly consumed on the altar; no part of it was eaten either by the priests or the offerer. It was designed to propitiate the anger of God incurred by original sin, or by particular transgressions; and its entire combustion indicated the self-dedication of the offerer--his whole nature--his body and soul--as necessary to form a sacrifice acceptable to God (Rom 12:1; Phi 1:20). This was the most ancient as well as the most conspicuous mode of sacrifice. a male without blemish--No animal was allowed to be offered that had any deformity or defect. Among the Egyptians, a minute inspection was made by the priest; and the bullock having been declared perfect, a certificate to that effect being fastened to its horns with wax, was sealed with his ring, and no other might be substituted. A similar process of examining the condition of the beasts brought as offerings, seems to have been adopted by the priests in Israel (Joh 6:27). at the door of the tabernacle--where stood the altar of burnt offering (Exo 40:6). Every other place was forbidden, under the highest penalty (Lev 17:4).

shall put his hand upon the head--This was a significant act which implied not only that the offerer devoted the animal to God, but that he confessed his consciousness of sin and prayed that his guilt and its punishment might be transferred to the victim. and it shall be--rather, "that it may be an acceptable atonement."

he shall kill the bullock--The animal should be killed by the offerer, not by the priest, for it was not his duty in case of voluntary sacrifices; in later times, however, the office was generally performed by Levites. before the Lord--on the spot where the hands had been laid upon the animal's head, on the north side of the altar. sprinkle the blood--This was to be done by the priests. The blood being considered the life, the effusion of it was the essential part of the sacrifice; and the sprinkling of it--the application of the atonement--made the person and services of the offerer acceptable to God. The skin having been stripped off, and the carcass cut up, the various pieces were disposed on the altar in the manner best calculated to facilitate their being consumed by the fire.

but his inwards and his legs shall he wash in water, &c.--This part of the ceremony was symbolical of the inward purity, and the holy walk, that became acceptable worshippers. a sweet savour unto the Lord--is an expression of the offerer's piety, but especially as a sacrificial type of Christ.

if his offering be of the flocks--Those who could not afford the expense of a bullock might offer a ram or a he-goat, and the same ceremonies were to be observed in the act of offering.

if the burnt sacrifice . . . be of fowls--The gentle nature and cleanly habits of the dove led to its selection, while all other fowls were rejected, either for the fierceness of their disposition or the grossness of their taste; and in this case, there being from the smallness of the animal no blood for waste, the priest was directed to prepare it at the altar and sprinkle the blood. This was the offering appointed for the poor. The fowls were always offered in pairs, and the reason why Moses ordered two turtledoves or two young pigeons, was not merely to suit the convenience of the offerer, but according as the latter was in season; for pigeons are sometimes quite hard and unfit for eating, at which time turtledoves are very good in Egypt and Palestine. The turtledoves are not restricted to any age because they are always good when they appear in those countries, being birds of passage; but the age of the pigeons is particularly marked that they might not be offered to God at times when they are rejected by men [HARMER]. It is obvious, from the varying scale of these voluntary sacrifices, that the disposition of the offerer was the thing looked to--not the costliness of his offering. Next: Leviticus Chapter 2

And the Lord called unto Moses,.... Or "met him", as the phrase is rendered in Numbers 23:4. The word translated "called", the last letter of it is written in a very small character, to show, as the Jews (b) say, that he met him accidentally, and unawares to Moses: other mysteries they observe in it, as that it respects the modesty of Moses, who lessened himself, and got out of the way, that he might not have the government laid upon him, and therefore the Lord called him; or to denote the wonderful condescension of the Lord, whose throne is in heaven, and yet vouchsafed to dwell in the tabernacle, out of which he called to Moses, and from Mount Sinai, and out of the cloud (c). The word "Lord" is not in this clause, but the following, from whence it is supplied by our translators, as it is in the Syriac version, and as the word "God" is in the Arabic version; the two Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem paraphrase it,"the Word of the Lord called to Moses,''by an articulate voice, though it may be it was a still small one; and which some think is the reason of the smallness of the letter before mentioned; and Aben Ezra says that Moses heard it, but all Israel did not hear: and spoke unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation; from off the mercy seat, between the cherubim over the ark, where the glory of the Lord, or the divine Shechinah and Majesty took up its residence, and from whence the Lord promised to commune with Moses, Exodus 25:22, saying; what follows concerning sacrifices; which shows, that these were not human inventions, but of divine institution, and by the appointment of God. (b) Vid. Buxtorf. Tiberias, c. 15. p. 39. (c) R. Abraham Seba, Tzeror Hammor, fol. 92. 1. 2.

Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them,.... For unto no other was the law of sacrifices given; not to the Gentiles, but to the children of Israel: if any man; or woman, for the word "man", as Ben Gersom observes, includes the whole species: of you; of you Israelites; the Targum of Jonathan adds,"and not of the apostates who worship idols.''Jarchi interprets it of yours, of your mammon or substance, what was their own property, and not what was stolen from another (d), see Isaiah 61:8, bring an offering unto the Lord; called "Korban" of "Karab", to draw nigh, because it was not only brought nigh to God, to the door of the tabernacle where he dwelt, but because by it they drew nigh to God, and presented themselves to him, and that for them; typical of believers under the Gospel dispensation drawing nigh to God through Christ, by whom their spiritual sacrifices are presented and accepted in virtue of his: ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock; that is, of oxen, and of sheep or goats. The Targum of Jonathan is,"of a clean beast, of oxen, and of sheep, but not of wild beasts shall ye bring your offerings.''These were appointed, Ben Gersom says, for these two reasons, partly because the most excellent, and partly because most easy to be found and come at, as wild creatures are not: but the true reason is, because they were very fit to represent the great sacrifice Christ, which all sacrifices were typical of; the ox or bullock was a proper emblem of him for his strength and laboriousness, and the sheep for his harmlessness, innocence, and patience, and the goat, as he was not in himself, but as he was thought to be, a sinner, being sent in the likeness of sinful flesh, and being traduced as such, and having the sins of his people imputed to him. (d) Vid. T. Bab. Succah, fol. 30. 1. & not. Abendana in Miclol Yophi in loc.

If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd,.... So called, because consumed by fire, see Leviticus 6:9 even all of it except the skin, and therefore its name with the Greeks is "a whole burnt offering", as in Mark 12:33 its name in Hebrew is which comes from a word which signifies to "ascend" or "go up", because not only it was carried up to the altar by the priest, which was common to other sacrifices, but being burnt upon it, it ascended upwards in smoke and vapour; it was typical of Christ's dolorous sufferings and death, who therein sustained the fire of divine wrath, and his strength was dried up like a potsherd with it. Jarchi on Leviticus 1:1 says, there were in the burnt offerings mysteries of future things: let him offer a male; and not a female, pointing at the Messiah's sex, and his strength and excellency, the child that was to be born, and the Son to be given, whose name should be Immanuel: without blemish; or perfect, having no part wanting, nor any part superfluous, nor any spot upon it, see Leviticus 22:19 denoting the perfection of Christ as man, being in all things made like unto his brethren, and his having not the least stain or blemish of sin upon him, either original or actual, and so could, as he did, offer up himself without spot to God, Hebrews 2:17, and he shall offer it of his own voluntary will; not forced or compelled to it, or with any reluctancy, but as a pure freewill offering; so our Lord Jesus Christ laid down his life of himself, and freely gave himself an offering and a sacrifice, and became cheerfully and readily obedient unto death: at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, before the Lord; it was to be done openly and publicly, and in the presence of the Lord, to whom it was offered up; showing, that Christ's sacrifice would be offered up to God, against whom we have sinned, by which his law would be fulfilled, his justice satisfied, and wrath appeased, and that his death would be public and notorious; see Luke 24:18.

And he shall put his hand on the head of the burnt offering,.... According to the Targum of Jonathan, it was his right hand; but it is generally thought by the Jewish writers that both hands were laid on; so Ben Gersom and Aben Ezra, with whom Maimonides (e) agrees, who says, he that lays on hands ought to lay on with all his strength, with both his hands upon the head of the beast, as it is said, "upon the head of the burnt offering": not upon the neck, nor upon the sides; and there should be nothing between his hands and the beast: and as the same writer says (f), it must be his own hand, and not the hand of his wife, nor the hand of his servant, nor his messenger; and who also observes (g), that at the same time he made confession over the burnt offering both of his sins committed against affirmative and negative precepts: and indeed by this action he owned that he had sinned, and deserved to die as that creature he brought was about to do, and that he expected pardon of his sin through the death of the great sacrifice that was a type of. Moreover, this action signified the transferring of his sins from himself to this sacrifice, which was to be offered up to make atonement for them; so Gersom observes; see Leviticus 16:21. This denotes the translation of our sins from us, and the imputation of them to Christ, who was offered up in our room and stead, to make atonement for them, as follows: and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him: that is, the burnt offering should be accepted in his room and stead, and hereby an atonement of his sins should be made for him, typical of that true, real, and full atonement made by the sacrifice of Christ, which this led his faith unto. (e) Hilchot Maaseh Hakorbanot, c. 3. sect. 13. (f) Hilchot Maaseh Hakorbanot, c. 3. sect. 8. Vid. T. Bab. Menachot, fol. 93. 2.((g) Ib. sect. 14.

And he shall kill the bullock before the Lord,.... That is, the man that brings the burnt offering, for no other is yet spoken of; and according to the traditions of the elders (h), killing of the sacrifice was right when done by strangers, by women, and by servants, and by unclean persons, even in the most holy things so be it that the unclean did not touch the flesh; and it is observed (i), that the service of the priest begins in the next clause, killing being lawful by him that was not a priest, according to the Targum of Jonathan, the butcher; but Aben Ezra interprets it of the priests, and certain it is, that the burnt offerings of the fowls were killed by the priests, Leviticus 1:15 and the Septuagint version renders it, "and they shall kill": but be this as it will, the burnt offering was to be killed in the court before the Lord; and this was typical of the death of Christ, who, according to these types, as well as to other prophecies, was to die for the sins of men, and accordingly did; and if this was the proprietor and not the priest that killed the sacrifice, it may denote that the sins of God's people, for whom Christ's sacrifice was offered up, were the cause of his death: and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall bring the blood: in vessels or basins, as the Targum of Jonathan adds, into which they received it when slain: and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation; which was the altar of burnt offering, and not the altar of incense, as appears by the situation of it, see Exodus 40:5 and the blood was sprinkled all around the altar with two sprinklings: the rule in the Misnah is (k); the slaying of the burnt offering is in the north, and the reception of its blood into the ministering vessels is in the north, and its blood ought to have two sprinklings, which answer to four; which Maimonides (l) explains thus; because it is said "round about", it must needs be that the sprinklings should comprehend the four sides of the altar; and this is done when the two sprinklings are upon the two horns, which are diametrically opposite; and this is what is meant, "which are four"; the sense is, that those two should include the four sides, and the two opposite horns were the northeast and the southwest, as he and other Jewish writers observe (m), and which he expresses more clearly elsewhere (n): when the priest took the blood in the basin, he sprinkled out of it in the basin, two sprinklings upon the two corners of the altar opposite from it; and he ordered it so to sprinkle the blood upon the horn, that the blood might surround the corners in the form of the Greek letter "gamma" (o); so that the blood of the two sprinklings might be found upon the four sides of the altar; because it is said of the burnt offerings, and of the peace offerings "round about"; and this is the law for the trespass offering, and the rest of the blood was poured out at the bottom southward: now this was always done by a priest, for though the bullock might be killed by a stranger, as Gersom on the place observes, yet its blood must be sprinkled by a priest; and it is the note of Aben Ezra, that this might be done by many, and therefore it is said, the "priests, Aaron's sons", when the slaying of it was only by one. The "altar" on which the blood was sprinkled typified the divinity of Christ, which gave virtue to his blood, whereby it made atonement for sin; and in allusion to this rite Christ's blood is called "the blood of sprinkling", 1 Peter 1:2 Hebrews 12:24 which being sprinkled on the heart by the Spirit of God clears it from an evil conscience, and purges the conscience from dead works, and speaks peace and pardon there, Hebrews 10:22. (h) Misn. Zebachim, c. 3. sect. 1. & Maimon. in ib. T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 27. 1. & Zebachim, fol. 32. 1. & Menachot, fol. 19. 1.((i) Bartenora in Misn. Zebachim, ib. (k) Misn. Zebachim, c. 5. sect. 4. (l) Perush in ib. (m) Jarchi, Bartenora, & Yom Tob, in ib. (n) Hilchot Korbanot, c. 5. sect. 6. (o) Vid. T. Bab. Zebachim, fol. 53. 2.

And he shall flay the burnt offering,.... Take off its skin; this was the only part of it that was not burnt, and was the property of the priest, Leviticus 7:8 but who this was done by is not so manifest, since it is in the singular number "he", and seems to be the bringer of the offering; for Aaron's sons, the priests that sprinkled the blood, are spoken of plurally; and agreeably, Gersom observes, that the flaying of the burnt offering and cutting it in pieces were lawful to be done by a stranger; but Aben Ezra interprets "he" of the priest; and the Septuagint and Samaritan versions read in the plural number, "they shall flay", &c. and this was the work of the priests, and who were sometimes helped in it by their brethren, the Levites, 2 Chronicles 29:34 and as this follows upon the sprinkling of the blood, it was never done till that was; the rule is, they do not flay them (the sacrifices) until the blood is sprinkled, except the sin offerings, which are burnt, for they do not flay them at all (p). The flaying of the burnt offering may denote the very great sufferings of Christ, when he was stripped of his clothes, and his back was given to the smiters, and his cheeks to them that plucked off the hair; and the skin of the sacrifice, which belonged to the priest, may be an emblem of the righteousness of Christ, and which also was signified by the coats of skins the Lord God made for Adam and Eve, Genesis 3:21 that robe of righteousness, and garments of salvation, which all that are made kings and priests to God are clothed with: and cut it into his pieces; which was done while he was flaying it, and after this manner, as Maimonides relates (q), he flays until he comes to the breast, and then he cuts off the head, then its legs, and finishes the flaying; then he rends the heart, and brings out its blood; then he cuts off the hands, and goes to the right foot, and cuts off that, and after that he cuts down the beast until its bowels are discovered; he takes the knife and separates the lights from the liver, and the caul of the liver from the liver, and does not remove the liver out of its place; and he goes up to the right side, and cuts and descends to the backbone, and he does not go to the backbone until he comes to the two tender ribs; he comes to the neck, and leaves in it two ribs here and two ribs there; he cuts it and comes to the left side, and leaves in it two tender ribs above and two tender ribs below; then he comes to the point of the backbone, he cuts it, and gives it and the tail, and the caul of the liver, and the two kidneys with it; he takes the left foot and gives it to another; and according to this order they flay and cut in pieces the burnt offering of the cattle; and these are the pieces spoken of in the law, Leviticus 1:6 some apply this to the ministers of the Gospel, rightly dividing the word of God, and to the effect the word has in dividing asunder soul and spirit; but it is best to apply it to Christ, either to the evidence given of him in the Gospel, in which he is clearly set forth in his person, natures, and offices, and in all the parts and branches thereof; where every thing is naked and open to view, as the creature was when thus cut up; or rather to his sufferings, which he endured in every part of his body, from head to foot. (p) Hilchot Korbanot, c. 5. sect. 18. (q) Ib. c. 6. sect. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. Vid. Misnah Tamid, c. 4. sect. 2, 3.

And the sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire upon the altar,.... The fire of the altar originally came down from heaven, and consumed the sacrifice, and which was a token of God's acceptance of it, see Leviticus 9:24 and this fire was kept burning continually upon the altar, Leviticus 6:12 and yet the Jewish writers say, it was the command of God, according to this passage, that fire should be brought from another place and put here; Jarchi's note on the text is,"though fire came down from heaven, it was commanded to bring it from a common or private place:''and Maimonides (r) says the same thing, and so it is often said in the Talmud (s); and this, as Gersom observes, was not done by any but a priest in the time of his priesthood, or when clothed with his priestly garments; and so in the Talmud it is said, that the putting fire upon the altar belonged to the priesthood, but not flaying or cutting in pieces (t): this fire denoted the wrath of God, revealed from heaven against all unrighteousness and ungodliness of men, and which is the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels, and all the workers of iniquity; and which Christ endured for his people in human nature, when he bore their sins, and became a whole burnt offering for them: and lay the wood in order upon the fire; the wood for the sacrifice was an offering of the people, brought to the temple at the times appointed, Nehemiah 10:34 where was a place called , "the wood room", or "wood chamber", and which was in the northeast part of the court of the women; and here such priests as had blemishes wormed the wood, or searched the wood for worms; for whatsoever wood had a worm found in it, it was not fit to be laid upon the altar; and it was from hence the priests fetched the wood and laid it on the altar (u); for a private person might not bring it from his own house for his offering (w), though it was provided by the congregation (x), and brought thither by private persons; and it might be any sort of wood but that of the vine and olive (y), which were not used, because they did not burn well, and were soon reduced to ashes; and because such a consumption would be made of such useful trees hereby, that there would be no wine or oil in the land of Israel, so necessary for private and religious uses. The Vulgate Latin version renders it, "the pile of wood being laid before": that is, before the fire was put upon the altar; but this is contrary to the text, for the wood was laid upon the fire, and therefore the fire must be first; the case seems to be this, the fire was first kindled, and then the wood laid in order upon it. (r) Hilchot. Tamidin, c. 2. sect. 1.((s) T. Bab. Erubin, fol. 63. 1. Yoma, fol. 21. 2. & 53. 1.((t) T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 26. 2. Vid. T. Bab. Zebachim, fol. 18. 1.((u) Misn. Middot, c. 2. sect. 5. (w) Issure Mizbeach, c. 5. sect. 13. T. Bab. Cholin, fol. 27. 1.((x) T. Bab. Menachot, fol. 22. 1.((y) Misn. Tamid, c. 2. sect. 3. & T. Bab. Tamid, fol. 29. 2.

And the priests, Aaron's sons, shall lay the parts,.... That were cut in pieces, Leviticus 1:6 some of which are particularly mentioned: the head and the fat; the head which was cut off, and the body, the trunk of it; so, Aben Ezra says, the wise men interpret the word "fat", which is only used here and in Leviticus 1:12 and which he thinks is right; though others take it to be the fat caul, or midriff, which parts the entrails; and the Targum of Jonathan renders it, the covering of fat: these are particularly mentioned, but include in general the rest of the pieces, which were laid: in order upon the wood that is on the fire which is upon the altar; this disposition of the several parts of the burnt offering upon the altar signifies the laying of Christ upon the cross, and the disposition of his head, his hands, and feet there; according to the usual order of crucifixion: the skin, as before observed, was not burnt, but was the property of the priest, and the sinew that shrunk was taken away, and cast upon the ashes in the middle of the altar (z). (z) Ib. Maaseh Hakorbanot, c. 6. sect. 4.

But the inwards and his legs shall he wash in water,.... This was first done in a room in the court of the temple, called , "the room of the washers", or the washing room, where they washed the inwards of the holy things (a); and after that they washed them upon the marble tables between the pillars, where they washed them three times at least (b); and whereas this is said to be done "in water"; Maimonides (c) observes,"not in wine, nor in a mixture of wine and water, nor in other liquids:''the washing of the inwards and legs denoted the internal purity of Christ's heart, and the external holiness of his life and conversation, and the saints' purification by him both in heart and life: with Philo the Jew (d) these things had a mystical meaning; by the washing of the inwards was signified that lusts were to be washed away, and such spots removed as were contracted by surfeiting and drunkenness, very harmful to the lives of men; and by the washing of the feet was signified that we should no more walk upon the earth, but mount up to the air, and pass through that, even to heaven: and the priest shall burn all on the altar; all the other pieces, as well as the inwards and legs, excepting the skin, which denoted the painful sufferings of Christ, and the extent of them to all parts of his body; and indeed his soul felt the fire of divine wrath, and became an offering for sin: to be a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire; that is, all the parts of the bullock were burnt on the altar, that it might appear to be a whole burnt offering consumed by fire: of a sweet savour unto the Lord: he accepting of it, and smelling a sweet savour of rest in it, as an atonement for sin, typical of the sacrifice of Christ, which is to God for a sweet smelling savour, Ephesians 5:2 the Jewish doctors (e) gather from hence, that whether a man offers much or little, it matters not, if his heart is but directed to God; which Maimonides explains thus (f), he that studies in the law, it is all one as if he offered a burnt offering, or a meat offering, or a sin offering, concerning which this phrase is used. (a) Misn. Middot, c. 5. sect. 2. Maimon Beth Habechirah, c. 5. sect. 17. (b) Ib. c. 3. sect. 5. & Tamid, c. 4. sect. 2. Piske, Tosaphot Middot, Art. 23. (c) Hilchot Hakorbanot, c. 6. sect. 6. Vid. T. Bab. Zebachim, fol. 22. 1.((d) De Victimis, p. 839. (e) Misn. Menachot, c. 13. sect. 11. T. Bab. Shebuot, fol. 15. 1.((f) In Misn. ib.

And if his offering be of the flocks,.... As it might be: namely, of the sheep, or of the goats for a burnt sacrifice; which were both typical of Christ; see Gill on Leviticus 1:2. he shall bring it a male without blemish; See Gill on Leviticus 1:3.

And he shall kill it on the side of the altar northward before the Lord,.... This is a circumstance not mentioned in the killing of the bullock: Maimonides (g) says, there was a square place from the wall of the altar northward, to the wall of the court, and it was sixty cubits, and all that was over against the breadth of this, from the wall of the porch to the eastern wall, and it is seventy six cubits; and this foursquare place is called the "north", for the slaying of the most holy things; so that it seems this being a large place, was fittest for this purpose. Aben Ezra intimates, as if some respect was had to the situation of Mount Zion; his note is, "on the side of the altar northward", i.e. without, and so "the sides of the north", Psalm 48:2 for so many mistake who say that the tower of Zion was in the midst of Jerusalem; and with this agrees Mr. Ainsworth's note on Leviticus 6:25 hereby was figured, that Christ our sin offering should be killed by the priests in Jerusalem, and Mount Sion, which was on "the sides of the north", Psalm 48:2 crucified on Mount Calvary, which was on the northwest side of Jerusalem; as by the Jews' tradition, the morning sacrifice was killed at the northwest horn of the altar (h): and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar; See Gill on Leviticus 1:5. (g) In Misn. Zebachim, c. 5. sect. 1.((h) Misn. Tamid, c. 4. sect. 1.

And he shall cut it into his pieces, with his head and his fat,.... Or "his body", as the Targum of Jonathan; this was to be cut in pieces in the same manner as the bullock; see Gill on Leviticus 1:6, and the priest shall lay them in order on the wood that is on the fire, which is on the altar; See Gill on Leviticus 1:8.

But he shall wash the inwards and the legs with water,.... As he did the bullock, Leviticus 1:9, and the priest shall bring it all: all the parts to the ascent of the altar, as the Jews (i) interpret it; all the parts and pieces of it, even the very wool on the sheep's head, and the hair on the goat's beard, their bones, sinews, and horns, and hoofs (k), all were burnt, as it follows: and burn it on the altar, it is a burnt offering, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord; See Gill on Leviticus 1:9. (i) T. Bab. Pesachim, fol. 65. 2. & Yoma, fol. 27. 1. Chagigah, fol. 11. 1.((k) Misn. Zebachim, c. 9. sect. 5. Maimon. Hilchot Hakorbanot, c. 6. sect. 2.

And if the burnt sacrifice for his offering to the Lord be of fowls,.... As it might be for the poorer sort, who could not offer a bullock, nor a sheep, or a lamb, Leviticus 5:7, then he shall bring his offering of turtledoves, or of young pigeons; the Jewish writers all agree, that the turtles should be old, and not young, as the pigeons young, and not old; so the Targum of Jonathan, Jarchi, Aben Ezra and Gersom (l); the latter gives two reasons for it, because then they are the choicest and easiest to be found and taken: no mention is made of their being male or female, either would do, or of their being perfect and unblemished, as in the other burnt offerings; but if any part was wanting, it was not fit for sacrifice, as Maimonides (m) observes. These creatures were proper emblems of Christ, and therefore used in sacrifice, whose voice is compared to the turtle's, and his eyes to the eyes of doves, Sol 2:12 and who is fitly represented by them for his meekness and humility, for his chaste and strong affection to his church, as the turtledove to its mate, and for those dove like graces of the Spirit which are in him. (l) Vid. T. Bab. Cholin, fol. 22. 1, 2.((m) Issure Mizbeach, c. 3. sect. 1, 2. Vid. Misn. Zebachim, c. 7. sect. 5. & Maimon. & Bartenora, in ib.

And the priest shall bring it unto the altar,.... The southeast horn of it; near which was the place of the ashes, into which the crop and its feathers were cast (n): and wring off his head; by twisting it back as it should seem; the word used is only to be found here, and in Leviticus 5:8 the Jews say, it signifies to cut with the nail, and that the priest did this, not with a knife or any other instrument, but with his nail; so Jarchi and Gersom on the place observe: some think he only let out the blood this way, but did not separate the head from the body, which seems to be favoured by Leviticus 5:8 though Maimonides and Bartenora (o) conclude the reverse from the same place; and that the meaning is, that he should cut off the head and divide it asunder at the time he cuts with the nail: the manner of cutting with the nail was this (p), the priest held both the feet of the bird with his two fingers of his left hand, and the wings between two other fingers, and the bird upon the back of his hand, that it might not be within the palm of it; then he stretches out its neck upon the thumb about two fingers' breadth, and cuts it over against the neck with his nail, and this is one of the hardest services in the sanctuary: and burn it on the altar; that is, the head, after squeezing out the blood, and rubbing it with salt: and the blood thereof shall be wrung out at the side of the altar: or "the wall" of it: this, though mentioned last, must be done before, and immediately upon the wringing of the head, and between that and the burning it on the altar: this wringing off the head, and wringing out the blood, denote violence, and show that Christ's death, which this was a type of, was a violent one; the Jews laid violent hands upon him, and pursued his life in a violent manner, were very pressing to have it taken away, and his life was taken away in such a manner by men, though not without his Father's secret will, and his own consent. (n) Misn. Zebachim, c. 6. sect. 5. & Bartenora in ib. (o) In Misn. ib. (p) Maimon. in Misn. ib. sect. 4. & Bartenora. in ib.

And he shall pluck away his crop with his feathers,.... Or "with its meat", or "dung", as Onkelos renders it, meaning that which was in its crop; and so the Jerusalem Targum interprets it, "with its dung"; and Jonathan's paraphrase is, "with its collection", or what was gathered together in the crop; it includes the entrails, as Gersom observes: and cast it beside the altar on the east part, by the place of the ashes; where the ashes of the burnt offering were put every day, and every time such an offering was made; and all this answered to the washing of the inwards, and legs of the other burnt offerings, and signified the same thing, the cleanness and purity of Christ, and of his people by him.

And he shall cleave it with the wings thereof,.... One wing being on one side, and the other on the other side: but shall not divide it asunder; the body of the bird, though it was cleaved down in the middle, yet not parted asunder, nor any of its wings separated from it; the Targum of Jonathan paraphrases it, "but shall not separate its wings from it"; this denoted, that though, by the death of Christ, his soul and body were separated from each other, yet the human nature was not separated from his divine Person, the personal union between the two natures still continuing; nor was he divided from his divine Father, though he was forsaken by him, yet still in union with him as the Son of God; nor from the divine Spirit, by which he offered up himself to God, and by which he was quickened; nor from his church and people, for whom he suffered, they being united to him as members to their head: and the priest shall burn it upon the altar, upon the wood that is upon the fire; in like manner as the ox, sheep, or goat were burnt: according to the Misnah, the priest went up the ascent (of the altar) and turned round about the circuit; when he came to the southeast horn, he cut its head (or nipped it) with his nail, over against its neck, and divided it, and squeezed out its blood by the wall of the altar, and turned the part nipped to the altar, and struck it at it, and rubbed it with salt, and cast it upon the fires; then he went to the body and removed the crop and its feathers (or dung) and the entrails that came out along with it, and threw them into the place of ashes; he cleaved but did not divide asunder, but if he divided it was right, then he rubbed it with salt, and cast it upon the fires (q): it is a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord; See Gill on Leviticus 1:9 so with the Heathens, to the gods of the air they sacrificed fowls for burnt offerings (r). (q) Misn. Zebachim, c. 6. sect. 5. (r) Porphyr. apud Euseb. Praepar. Evangel. l. 4. c. 9. p. 146. Vid. Maoreb. Saturnal. l. 3. c. 8.

the fat--that about the kidneys especially, which is called "suet."