Leviticus 3:7–4:12

And the priest shall burn them. He justly assigns to the priest the main duties of sacrificing, i.e., to sprinkle the blood, and to cast the fat into the fire, since he alone was competent to make atonement. Moreover, although there is a harsh metaphor contained in the word "food," yet it admirably expresses what the Holy Spirit would teach, that the legal service pleased God, just as the food which we eat is pleasing to us; whilst it at the same time marks God's familiar communion with His people, as if He sat at the same table with them. It is indeed sure that God, who breathes life into all, and borrows nothing from any, does not want food; but His incomparable kindness could not be better shewn forth, than by deigning to make Himself, as it were, the messmate of His worshippers. In the same figure of speech the ingratitude of the people is reproved by Malachi, when he says, "The table of the Lord is polluted, and the fruit thereof, even his meat, is contemptible," (Malachi 1:12;) not because God delighted in the fat of fed beasts, or in bread; but because it was a gross and intolerable act of impiety to neglect this extraordinary pledge of His grace. This similitude, however, ought to be referred to the truth it represents, viz., that the exercise of faith, and the proofs of our piety, are no less pleasing to God than as if He should be feasted delicately and sumptuously; wherefore we ought to take the greater care not to defraud Him of the things He takes delight in. It is not very clear to me why God claims for Himself the fat in all the sacrifices, and commands it to be burnt, unless that in this way He might accustom His servants to temperance. We have already seen that the fat is certainly accounted the most delicate part, where Moses applies this word to corn and wine; and this also is plain from Psalm 63:5, "My soul shall be satisfied as with marrow and fatness." And when God declares (Isaiah 1:11,) that He does not desire "the fat," He signifies that He does not require for His own sake the choicest part of animals, but that the Israelites might remember that they should partake soberly of all their food, as if they had consecrated the best and first-fruits of it. If any one desire a more distinct exposition of this, the offering of the fat taught them to pay more honor to the service of God; and secondly, it instructed them in abstinence. The allegories, suited only to tickle men's ears, must be sought from others. [255] Isychius, after having pretended that the fat represented spiritual affections, soon afterwards metamorphoses it into gross appetites. Others suppose that Christ was designed by it. Others understand by it that the grossness or fatness of our flesh must be refined by the fire of the Spirit, that it may be mortified unto God. This simple meaning satisfies me, that, when the Law permitted them to eat the sacred meats, an exception was added, which left the best portion in God's hands; secondly, that the part which might have been most attractive to the greedy, was consumed in the fire as a restraint upon their gluttony. The eating of blood is here prohibited, as also elsewhere, because it was consecrated to God in order to make expiation; but there was another and higher reason why it was forbidden, of which mention was made in [20]Genesis 9, and which must be [21]again handled in our exposition of the Sixth Commandment. Footnotes: [253] Vide supra, [22]p. 149, and [23]note. [254] A.V., "before the Lord." [255] Abundance of these may be found collected by Lorinus. Bonar says, "Observe that all these portions of the animal are the richest; and also deep-seated, near the heart. In an offering of thanks and fellowship, nothing was more appropriate than to enjoin that the pieces presented should be those seated deep within." The marginal deduction of Corn. a Lapide, is not very dissimilar: "Mystice, adeps est devotio et intentio, quae in omni opere ad Deum est dirigenda."

Directions are here given concerning the peace-offering, if it was a sheep or a goat. Turtle-doves or young pigeons, which might be brought for whole burnt offerings, were not allowed for peace-offerings, because they have no fat considerable enough to be burnt upon the altar; and they would be next to nothing if they were to be divided according to the law of the peace-offerings. The laws concerning a lamb or goat offered for a peace offering are much the same with those concerning a bullock, and little now occurs here; but, 1. The rump of the mutton was to be burnt with the fat of the inwards upon the altar, the whole rump (Lev 3:9), because in those countries it was very fat and large. Some observe from this that, be a thing ever so contemptible, God can make it honourable, by applying it to his service. Thus God is said to give more abundant honour to that part which lacked, Co1 12:23, Co1 12:24. 2. That which was burnt upon the altar is called the food of the offering, Lev 3:11, Lev 3:16. It fed the holy fire; it was acceptable to God as our food is to us; and since in the tabernacle God did, as it were, keep house among them, by the offerings on the altar he kept a good table, as Solomon in his court, Kg1 4:22, etc. 3. Here is a general rule laid down, that all the fat is the Lord's (Lev 3:16), and a law made thereupon, that they should eat neither fat nor blood, no, not in their private houses, Lev 3:17. (1.) As for the fat, it is not meant of that which is interlarded with the meat (that they might eat, Neh 8:10), but the fat of the inwards, the suet, which was always God's part out of the sacrificed beasts; and therefore they must not eat of it, no, not out of the beasts that they killed for their common use. Thus would God preserve the honour of that which was sacred to himself. They must not only not feed upon that fat which was to be the food of the altar, but not upon any like it, lest the table of the Lord (as the altar is called), if something were not reserved peculiar to it, should become contemptible, and the fruit thereof, even its meat, contemptible, Mal 1:7, Mal 1:12. (2.) The blood was universally forbidden likewise, for the same reason that the fat was, because it was God's part of every sacrifice. The heathen drank the blood of their sacrifices; hence we read of their drink-offerings of blood, Psa 16:4. But God would not permit the blood, that made atonement, to be used as a common thing (Heb 10:29), nor will he allow us, though we have the comfort of the atonement made, to assume to ourselves any share in the honour of making it. He that glories, let him glory in the Lord, and to his praise let all the blood be poured out.

if his offering be a goat--Whether this or any of the other two animals were chosen, the same general directions were to be followed in the ceremony of offering.

ye eat neither fat nor blood--The details given above distinctly define the fat in animals which was not to be eaten, so that all the rest, whatever adhered to other parts, or was intermixed with them, might be used. The prohibition of blood rested on a different foundation, being intended to preserve their reverence for the Messiah, who was to shed His blood as an stoning sacrifice for the sins of the world [BROWN]. Next: Leviticus Chapter 4

If he offer a lamb for his offering,.... Which was of the flock, and must be of the first year; this is a rule laid down by Maimonides (i), that where ever this word is used in the law, it signifies one of the first year: then shall he offer it before the Lord; bring it into the court, and present it to the priest. (i) Maaseh Hakorbanot, c. 1. sect. 14.

And he shall lay his hand upon the head of his offering,.... The Targum of Jonathan adds here, as before,"his right hand with strength:" and kill it before the tabernacle of the congregation; in the court, in any part of it; for, as Gersom says, all places were right for this; the man that brought it killed it, or the butcher, as the Targum of Jonathan says here also as on Leviticus 3:2, and Aaron's sons shall sprinkle the blood thereof round about upon the altar; upon the four horns of it; see Gill on Leviticus 3:2.

And he shall offer of the sacrifice of the peace offering,.... That is, the priest, Aaron, or one of his two sons: an offering made by fire unto the Lord; that part of it which was to be burnt with fire; and in the peace offering of the lamb there was something more than in the peace offering of the bullock, or of the goat, which follows: the fat thereof, and the whole rump, it shall he take off hard by the backbone; not the rump or tail, but the fat of it; the copulative "and" is not in the text; wherefore Aben Ezra says, that Gaon was mistaken in reading it as we do, "the fat there of", and "the whole rump"; but it should be rendered, "its fat of the whole rump", or "tail": in the eastern countries (k), some sheep and lambs had very large tails, and very fat ones, the least weighing ten or twelve pounds, the largest above forty, and were put in little carts for ease and safety; see Gill on Exodus 29:22 now such as were "whole", entire, perfect, and without blemish, as the word signifies, the fat of them that was next to the backbone was to be taken off of such as were brought for peace offerings: and the fat that covereth the inwards, and all the fat that is upon the inwards; as before; See Gill on Leviticus 3:3. (k) Vid. Ludolf. Hist. Ethiop. l. 1. c. 10. sect. 14.

And the two kidneys,.... The same direction is given here as about the bullock of the peace offering; see Gill on Leviticus 3:4.

And the priest shall burn it upon the altar,.... The fat of the tail, of the inwards, the two kidneys, and the caul of the liver: it is the food of the offering made by fire unto the Lord; or "bread"; this part of the offering that was burnt belonged to the Lord; it was his food, and what was accepted of by him, and therefore is elsewhere called the bread of God, Leviticus 21:8.

And if his offering be a goat,.... As it might be, and which also was of the flock: then he shall offer it before the Lord; in the same place and manner as the bullock and the lamb,

And he shall lay his hand upon the head of it,.... His right hand, according to the Targum of Jonathan, as before; the same directions are given for the killing of it, and for the sprinkling of its blood, as in the offerings of the bullock and lamb.

And he shall offer thereof his offering,.... The same rules are laid down about taking the fat off of several parts as in the sacrifice of the bullock; but nothing is said of the fat of the rump and tail, as is said of the lamb.

And the priest shall burn them upon the altar,.... Which shows that not the fat only, but the inwards and the kidneys, were burnt also; so Maimonides says (l), that the priest salted the parts, and burned them upon the altar; and the priests might not have the breast and shoulder (which were what belonged to them) until the parts were burnt: it is the food of the offering made by fire; which the Lord ate of, or accepted of: for a sweet savour; as a type of the sweet smelling sacrifice of Christ, with which he is well pleased: all the fat is the Lord's; that is, all that was upon the parts mentioned in the several sacrifices of peace offerings, which was to be taken off and burnt: though the Jewish writers understand it of all fat in general, and so interpret the law that follows. (l) Ut supra, (Maaseh Hakorbanot) c. 9. sect. 11.

It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations,.... That is, unto the end of the Mosaic dispensation, until the Messiah comes, and his sacrifice is offered up, and his blood is shed, till that time in all generations: and throughout all your dwellings; wherever their habitations should be, it is a law to be observed: that ye eat neither fat nor blood; the Jewish writers think, that this is not to be restrained to the fat and blood of sacrifices, because these were not offered in their dwellings, but in the tabernacle and temple, and therefore interpret it of fat and blood in general; but what fat and blood are meant may be seen in Leviticus 7:23 the Targum of Jonathan adds,"but upon the top of the altar it shall be offered to the name of the Lord,''which seems to restrain it to the sacrifices.

The laws contained in the first three chapters seem to have been delivered to Moses at one time. Here begin the statutes of another session, another day. From the throne of glory between the cherubim God delivered these orders. And he enters now upon a subject more strictly new than those before. Burnt-offerings, meat-offerings, and peace-offerings, it should seem, had been offered before the giving of the law upon mount Sinai; those sacrifices the patriarchs had not been altogether unacquainted with (Gen 8:20; Exo 20:24), and in them they had respect to sin, to make atonement for it, Job 1:5. But the law being now added because of transgressions (Gal 3:19), and having entered, that eventually the offence might abound (Rom 5:20), they were put into a way of making atonement for sin more particularly by sacrifice, which was (more than any of the ceremonial institutions) a shadow of good things to come, but the substance is Christ, and that one offering of himself by which he put away sin and perfected for ever those who are sanctified. I. The general case supposed we have, Lev 4:2. Here observe, 1. Concerning sin in general, that it is described to be against any of the commandments of the Lord; for sin is the transgression of the law, the divine law. The wits or wills of men, their inventions or their injunctions, cannot make that to be sin which the law of God has not made to be so. It is said likewise, if a soul sin, for it is not sin if it be not some way or other the soul's act; hence it is called the sin of the soul (Mic 6:7), and it is the soul that is injured by it, Pro 8:36. 2. Concerning the sins for which those offerings were appointed. (1.) They are supposed to be overt acts; for, had they been required to bring a sacrifice for every sinful thought or word, the task had been endless. Atonement was made for those in the gross, on the day of expiation, once a year; but these are said to be done against the commandments. (2.) They are supposed to be sins of commission, things which ought not to be done. Omissions are sins, and must come into judgment; but what had been omitted at one time might be done at another, and so to obey was better than sacrifice: but a commission was past recall. (3.) They are supposed to be sins committed through ignorance. If they were done presumptuously, and with an avowed contempt of the law and the Law-maker, the offender was to be cut off, and there remained no sacrifice for the sin, Heb 10:26, Heb 10:27; Num 15:30. But if the offender were either ignorant of the law, as in divers instances we may suppose many were (so numerous and various were the prohibitions), or were surprised into the sin unawares, the circumstances being such as made it evident that his resolution against the sin was sincere, but that he was overtaken in it, as the expression is (Gal 6:1), in this case relief was provided by the remedial law of the sin-offering. And the Jews say, "Those crimes only were to be expiated by sacrifice, if committed ignorantly, for which the criminal was to have been cut off if they had been committed presumptuously." II. The law begins with the case of the anointed priest, that is, the high priest, provided he should sin through ignorance; for the law made men priests who had infirmity. Though his ignorance was of all others least excusable, yet he was allowed to bring his offering. His office did not so far excuse his offence as that it should be forgiven him without a sacrifice; yet it did not so far aggravate it but that it should be forgiven him when he did bring his sacrifice. If he sin according to the sin of the people (so the case is put, Lev 4:3), which supposes him in this matter to stand upon the level with other Israelites, and to have no benefit of his clergy at all. Now the law concerning the sin-offering for the high priest is, 1. That he must bring a bullock without blemish for a sin-offering (Lev 4:3), as valuable an offering as that for the whole congregation (Lev 4:14); whereas for any other ruler, or a common person, a kid of the goats should serve, Lev 4:23, Lev 4:28. This intimated the greatness of the guilt connected with the sin of a high priest. The eminency of his station, and his relation both to God and to the people, greatly aggravated his offences; see Rom 2:21. 2. The hand of the offerer must be laid upon the head of the offering (Lev 4:4), with a solemn penitent confession of the sin he had committed, putting it upon the head of the sin-offering, Lev 16:21. No remission without confession, Psa 32:5; Pro 28:13. It signified also a confidence in this instituted way of expiating guilt, as a figure of something better yet to come, which they could not stedfastly discern. He that laid his hand on the head of the beast thereby owned that he deserved to die himself, and that it was God's great mercy that he would please to accept the offering of this beast to die for him. The Jewish writers themselves say that neither the sin-offering nor the trespass-offering made atonement, except for those that repented and believed in their atonement. 3. The bullock must be killed, and a great deal of solemnity there must be in disposing of the blood; for it was the blood that made atonement, and without shedding of blood there was no remission, Lev 4:5-7. Some of the blood of the high-priest's sin-offering was to be sprinkled seven times before the veil, with an eye towards the mercy-seat, though it was veiled: some of it was to be put upon the horns of the golden altar, because at that altar the priest himself ministered; and thus was signified the putting away of that pollution which from his sins did cleave to his services. It likewise serves to illustrate the influence which Christ's satisfaction has upon the prevalency of his intercession. The blood of his sacrifice is put upon the altar of his incense and sprinkled before the Lord. When this was done the remainder of the blood was poured at the foot of the brazen altar. By this rite, the sinner acknowledged that he deserved to have his blood thus poured out like water. It likewise signified the pouring out of the soul before God in true repentance, and typified our Saviour's pouring out his soul unto death. 4. The fat of the inwards was to be burnt upon the altar of burnt-offering, Lev 4:8-10. By this the intention of the offering and of the atonement made by it was directed to the glory of God, who, having been dishonoured by the sin, was thus honoured by the sacrifice. It signified the sharp sufferings of our Lord Jesus, when he was made sin (that is, a sin-offering) for us, especially the sorrows of his soul and his inward agonies. It likewise teaches us, in conformity to the death of Christ, to crucify the flesh. 5. The head and body of the beast, skin and all, were to be carried without the camp, to a certain place appointed for that purpose, and there burnt to ashes, Lev 4:11, Lev 4:12. This was very significant, (1.) Of the duty of repentance, which is the putting away of sin as a detestable thing, which our soul hates. True penitents say to their idols, "Get you hence; what have we to do any more with idols?" The sin-offering is called sin. What they did to that we must do to our sins; the body of sin must be destroyed, Rom 6:6. (2.) Of the privilege of remission. When God pardons sin he quite abolishes it, casts it behind his back. The iniquity of Judah shall be sought for and not found. The apostle takes particular notice of this ceremony, and applies it to Christ (Heb 13:11-13), who suffered without the gate, in the place of a skull, where the ashes of dead men, as those of the altar, were poured out.

If the priest that is anointed. He now distinguishes between different persons, and begins with the high priest, who alone bore the high distinction of the holy unction, unless it be thought better to apply it to the whole supreme class. [260] It is probable, however, that it only refers to one. The more illustrious was his dignity, the more diligently and zealously ought his life to be confirmed to the model of holiness; and therefore the infirmity which was more tolerable in others, was more exceedingly reprehensible in him. This is the reason why it was required that he should atone for himself with a greater victim. But this in some measure related to all the Levites, inasmuch as they were chosen to be of the sacred class; and it now extends to all the ministers and pastors of the Church, not that they should ransom themselves by the sacrifice of a calf, but that they should diligently beware of every sin, and be more intent in their endeavors after holiness. The clause "according to the sin of the people," might be also rendered "unto the sin," etc., as though Moses had said that the priest through sin corrupted the people by his bad example; for, since his life is the rule of holiness and righteousness, so his faults give occasion to the errors of others. The sense, however, that I have followed is simpler, i.e., that though the transgression of the priest may be an ordinary one, yet in consideration of his office it becomes more weighty, and deserving of greater punishment.

And the priest that is anointed shall take. It is well known that what is here prescribed as to the sprinkling of blood, and its pouring out, as well as to the burning of the fat and the kidneys, is the same as in the other sacrifices; and the comparison in the 10th verse sufficiently proves that, the ordinary forms were observed in other particulars. But inasmuch as it might seem absurd that the priest, who was himself guilty, should come before God to perform the office of reconciliation, it was necessary to prescribe the details more accurately, to obviate all doubt. Although, therefore, he was unworthy to approach God, yet, since the law of the priesthood was inviolable, he was admitted to the discharge of his duties; for it was not lawful that more mediators should be appointed. In order, then, that more reverence should be paid to the rites of the Law, and that men should seek after no other way of reconciliation, God extended His grace to the fault of the priest. The blood was sprinkled before the Lord, that the people might learn that through the sight of the sacrifice sins were hidden and buried, so as to come no more into remembrance before God; but the rest of the blood was poured before the altar, because it was holy, and therefore ought by no means to be cast elsewhere like anything profane.

SIN OFFERING FOR THE PRIEST. (Lev. 4:3-35) If the priest that is anointed do sin--that is, the high priest, in whom, considering his character as typical mediator, and his exalted office, the people had the deepest interest; and whose transgression of any part of the divine law, therefore, whether done unconsciously or heedlessly, was a very serious offense, both as regarded himself individually, and the influence of his example. He is the person principally meant, though the common order of the priesthood was included. according to the sin of the people--that is, bring guilt on the people. He was to take a young bullock (the age and sex being expressly mentioned), and having killed it according to the form prescribed for the burnt offerings, he was to take it into the holy place and sprinkle the atoning blood seven times before the veil, and tip with the crimson fluid the horns of the golden altar of incense, on his way to the court of the priests,--a solemn ceremonial appointed only for very grave and heinous offenses, and which betokened that his sin, though done in ignorance, had vitiated all his services; nor could any official duty he engaged in be beneficial either to himself or the people, unless it were atoned for by blood.

the skin of the bullock, and all his flesh--In ordinary circumstances, these were perquisites of the priests. But in the expiation necessary for a sin of the high priest, after the fat of the sacrifice was offered on the altar, the carcass was carried without the camp [Lev 4:12], in order that the total combustion of it in the place of ashes might the more strikingly indicate the enormity of the transgression, and the horror with which he regarded it (compare Heb 13:12-13).

And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying. Continued to speak to him, or, after some pause made, proceeded to speak to him, and give things in commandment concerning the sin offering, what it should be, and for whom, as follows.

Speak unto the children of Israel, saying,.... For this law concerning the sin offering, as the rest, only belonged to them, and such as were proselyted to them: if a soul should sin through ignorance; sin is from the soul, though committed by the body; it is the soul that sins, Ezekiel 18:4 it includes, as Aben Ezra observes, both Israelites and proselytes; who sinned through ignorance either of the law, that such things were forbidden, or of having committed them, they being done unobserved, and through inadvertency; or were forgotten that they were done, or were done through error and mistake; these sins are what the apostle calls the errors of the people, their strayings out of the way through ignorance and inadvertency, Hebrews 5:2 such sins as a man is overtaken with unawares, and is drawn into at once through temptation and the prevalence of corruption; these are the errors and secret faults which David distinguishes from presumptuous sins, Psalm 19:12, against any of the commandments of the Lord (concerning things which ought not to be done.) The Jewish writers (m) distinguish the commandments of the Lord into affirmative and negative, and make their number to be six hundred and thirteen; two hundred and forty eight are affirmative, according to the number of bones in a man's body, and three hundred sixty five are negative ones, according to the number of the days of the year; and they observe (n), it is only the transgression of negative precepts that is here meant, and for which a sin offering was to be brought: and shall do against any of them; it must be something done, and not merely said: hence the Jews (o) say, that as the neglect of circumcision, and of the passover, does not come under this law, because they are affirmative precepts; so neither blasphemy, because there is nothing done, only something said: of these sins of ignorance, they give instances as follows; if any man eats the fat that is about the kidneys, thinking it is the fat that is about the heart; or that lies with a woman forbidden by the law, thinking her to be his wife; or that commits idolatry, by bowing to the idol, thinking that the law forbids sacrifice, incense, and libation, but not bowing; or that profanes the sabbath, thinking it is a common day (p). (m) T. Bab. Maccot, fol. 23. 2.((n) Maimon. in Misn. Horayot, c. 2. sect. 3. Bartenora in Misn. Ceritot, c. 1. sect. 1. Gersom in loc. (o) Misn. Ceritot, c. 1. sect. 2. & Bartenora in ib. Maimon. Hilchot Shegagot, c. 1. sect. 2.((p) Maimon & Bartenora in Misn. Ceritot, ib.

If the priest that is anointed do sin,.... That is, the high priest, as the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan, and the Septuagint version, render it; who in after times was only anointed, though at first Aaron's sons were anointed with him; so an high priest is described in Leviticus 21:10 and such an one was liable to sin, and often did; which shows not only that the greatest and best of men are not without sin, but proves what the apostle observes, that the law made men high priests which had infirmity, even sinful infirmities, who needed to offer for themselves as well as for the people; by which it appeared that perfection could not be had by the Levitical priesthood, and that it was proper it should cease, and another priesthood take place, Hebrews 7:11, according to the sin of the people; committing the like sins of error and ignorance as the common people, to which he was liable as they; or "to make the people guilty"; as the margin reads; to which agrees the Septuagint version, "so that the people sin"; and the Vulgate Latin version, "making the people to sin"; either by his doctrine or example, and both through ignorance, heedlessness, and inadvertency: the Targum of Jonathan is,"when he offers the offering of sin for the people, not according to its manner''or rite; as if his sin lay in erring while he was offering; but be it in which way it may, whether by any unadvised inadvertent action of his own, or ignorant instruction of the people, so causing them to err, or any ignorance or mistake in offering the sacrifices of the people: then let him bring for the sin which he has sinned; in either way: a young bullock; not an ox which was three years old, nor a calf which was but of one year, but a bullock which was of two years; so Maimonides (q) observes, that wherever it is said a calf, that is a young one of the first year, but a bullock it is a young one of the second year: as are men's characters, so are the aggravations of their sins, and sacrifices were proportioned thereunto; the high priest was obliged to bring the same offering as the whole congregation did in a like case; see Leviticus 4:13. without blemish; a type of the sacrifice of Christ offered up without spot to God, as it follows: unto the Lord; against whom sin is committed, and therefore sacrifice both in the type and antitype must be brought and offered up to him, by whom it is accepted, and to whom it is of a sweetsmelling savour, namely, the unblemished sacrifice of Christ: for a sin offering; or "for sin": the sin offering is called sin itself, and so is Christ the antitype of it, 2 Corinthians 5:21 Christ is most holy in himself, had no sin in him, nor knew any, nor were any committed by him; yet he appeared in the likeness of sinful flesh, took the place of sinners, and was their substitute, had all their sins laid upon him, and was by imputation made sin itself, and became an offering for it, and so fully answered the type of the sin offering. (q) Maaseh Hakorbanot, c. 1. sect. 14.

And he shall bring the bullock unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the Lord,.... As the bullock of the burnt offering; See Gill on Leviticus 1:3, and shall lay his hand on the bullock's head; the Targum of Jonathan says his right hand; See Gill on Leviticus 1:4, and kill the bullock before the Lord; at the door of the tabernacle, that is, in the court, as Gersom observes; according to the above Targum, the butcher killed it, and not the priest: See Gill on Leviticus 1:5 all this is typical of the imputation of sin to Christ, and of his death.

And the priest that is anointed shall take of the bullock's blood,.... Let out and received into a basin; this he did himself, and not another, for he offered for himself, and the blood was to make atonement for him: and bring it to the tabernacle of the congregation; out of the court where the bullock was slain, into the holy place, where were the vail that divided between the holy of holies, and the altar of sweet incense, after mentioned.

And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood,.... The finger of his right hand, as Gersom observes, and so Maimonides (r); for blood was always taken and sprinkled with the right hand, if done with the left it was wrong, according to the Jewish canons (s) and though it is only said the priest, and not that is anointed, as before, yet it seems to mean him and not another; though if a private priest did this, Gersom says, it would be right, and so Maimonides (t): and sprinkle of the blood seven times before the Lord; a figure of the blood of Christ, called, in allusion to this rite, the blood of sprinkling; which being presented before the Lord, calls for pardon from him, and sprinkled on the conscience, speaks peace there, and perfectly cleanses from all sin, which the seven times sprinkling is a symbol of: before the vail of the sanctuary: the words may be literally rendered, "the face of the vail of the sanctuary": as if the blood was sprinkled on the outside of the vail. Jarchi's note is,"over against the place of its holiness, he directed (it) over against between the staves; the blood shall not touch the vail, but if it touches, it touches it;''that is, it is no matter. And according to Maimonides (u) the blood of bullocks and goats burnt was sprinkled seven times upon the vail, which divided between the and the holy of holies. This typified the vail of flesh, whose blood gives boldness to enter into the holiest of all, Hebrews 10:19. (r) Maaseh Hakorbanot, c. 5. sect. 7. Bartenora in Misn. Menachot, c. 3. sect. 4. (s) Misn. Zebachim, c. 2. sect. 1. & Bartenora in ib. (t) Maaseh Hakorbanot, c. 5. sect. 15. (u) Ib. sect. 13.

And the priest shall put some of the blood,.... With his finger, which he dipped into it: upon the horns of the altar of sweet incense before the Lord, which is in the tabernacle of the congregation; this was the golden altar on which incense was offered: it was placed before the vail, on the outside of it, in the holy place, see Exodus 30:1 and the priest, when he put the blood on the horns of it, began at the northeast horn, so to the northwest, then to the southwest, and last to the southeast (w); and the priest dipped his finger at every horn, and when he had finished at one horn, he wiped his finger at the edge of the basin, and after that dipped a second time; for what remained of the blood on his finger was not fit to put upon another horn (x). This rite shows, that the intercession of Christ, signified by the altar of sweet incense, proceeds upon the foot of his blood and sacrifice, Revelation 8:3 1 John 2:1, and shall pour all the blood of the bullock at the bottom of the altar of burnt offering, which is at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation; this altar stood without the holy place, and the altar of incense within; and after the priest had sprinkled of the blood of the bullock, upon the horns of the altar of incense, what remained he poured at the bottom of the altar of burnt offering; for though it is said "all" the blood, it can mean no more than what was left; wherefore the Vulgate Latin version renders it, "all the remaining blood": and Jarchi's explanatory note is, the rest of the blood. The place where this was poured, according to Maimonides (y), was the west bottom of the altar; and Gersom on the place observes the same. This denotes the efficacy of Christ's blood to make atonement for sin, and the reverent esteem it ought to be had in, being precious blood. (w) Misn. Yoma, c. 5. sect. 5. Maimon. ib. (Maasch Hakorbanot c. 5.) sect. 10. 14. (x) Maimon. ib. sect. 8. (y) Ib. sect. 11.

And he shall take off from it all the fat of the bullock for the sin offering,.... When the priest had killed the bullock, and sprinkled and poured the blood, as before commanded; he then cut up the bullock, and took out its inwards, and put them in a vessel, and salted them, and strowed them on the fires (z), and burnt them, and the fat of them, as he did with the sacrifice of the peace offerings; so that what is here said, and in the two next verses Leviticus 4:9, is the same with what is ordered concerning them in Leviticus 3:3; see Gill on Leviticus 3:3, Leviticus 3:4, Leviticus 3:5. Jarchi and Gersom both observe that they agree, that as one brings peace into the world, so does the other. (z) Maimon. ib. (Maasch Hakorbanot) c. 7. sect. 2.

And the skin of the bullock,.... Not taken off; for the sin offerings that were burnt were not flayed at all, but were cut in pieces with their skins on them (a); in other burnt offerings the skin was taken off, and was a perquisite of the priest, Leviticus 7:8 but this being an offering for the priest, the skin was burnt with the rest: and all his flesh, with his head, and with his legs, and his inwards, and his dung; the burning of these denoted the sufferings of Christ, and these several parts the extent of them, they reaching to all parts of his body as stretched upon the cross; and the dung particularly the reproach of them, he dying the death of the cross, and was made sin and a curse for his people. (a) Ib. (Maasch Hakoranot) c. 5. sect. 18. & 7. 2.

Even the whole bullock shall he carry forth without the camp,.... The Jewish writers interpret it without the three camps (b), the camp of the tabernacle, the camp of the Levites, and the camp of the Israelites; when the temple was built, such sacrifices were carried and burnt without the city of Jerusalem; there were three places for burning; one was in the midst of the court, where they burnt such sacrifices as were unfit and rejected; the other was in the mountain of the house called Birah, where they burnt such as any accident befell them, after the carrying of them out of the court; and the third place was without Jerusalem, called the place of ashes (c): this was typical of Christ being had out of the city of Jerusalem, and suffering without the gates of it, Hebrews 13:11, unto a clean place, where the ashes are poured out; the ashes of the burnt offerings. This, according to Ainsworth, answered to the place where Christ was crucified, being a place of skulls, or dead men's ashes, John 19:17, and burn him on the wood with fire; any wood might be used for the burning of it, even straw or stubble, which in the Hebrew language are called wood, as Gersom on the place observes, and so Maimonides (d); and it is added, "with fire", as the last writer says (e), to exclude lime and cinder coals: where the ashes are poured out shall he be burnt; openly without; and seeing it is not said, that the priest shall carry forth the bullock, and shall burn it, it is concluded by Gersom on the place, that both may be done lawfully by a stranger, and so Maimonides (f). (b) T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 68. 1. 2. & Sanhedrin, fol. 42. 2. Maimon. & Bartenora in Misn. Zebachim, c. 12. sect. 5. Jarchi in loc. (c) Maimon. Maaseh Hakorbanot, c. 7. sect. 3, 4. (d) Maimon. Hilchot Maaseh Hakorbanot, c. 7. sect. 5. (e) Ib. Vid. T. Bab. Pesachim, fol. 75. 1.((f) Maimon. ib.