Bible Commentary (1871–1879 Edition)

Bible Commentary (1871–1879 Edition)

Beauts that vw/y LEVITICUS XI. and may not he Eatm.

gave vent to no murmur of discontent, but submitted In as to fall into their Idolatries, or be contaminated with their vices : in short, to keep them a disl inct and peculiar people. To this purpose, no dlH'erenee of creed, no system of polity, no diversity of language or manner, was so subservient as a distinction of meats founded on religion

Bllenl resignation to what he saw was "the righteous Judgment of God." *, 5. Moses called Mlsliael and Elzaplian—The removal of the two corpses for burial Without the camp would spread,the painful intelligence Hmongst all the congregation. The interment of tlie and hence the Jews, who were tauglit by education to ablior many articles of food freely partaken of by other people, never, even at periods of great degeneracy, could amalgamate with the nations anioni;st wliicli they were dispersed. But although tiiis was Die principal foundation of these laws, dietetic reasons ailso Iwid weight; for there is no doubt that the fiesh of n\any of the animals here ranked as unclean, is every wliere, Init especially in warm climates, less wholesome and adapted for food than those which are allowed to be* eaten. These laws, therefore, being subservient to sanitary as well as I'eligious ends, were addressed both to Moses and Aaron. 3-7. -Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and ig cloven-footed ond cheweth the cud—Ruminating animals by the peculiar structure of their stomaclis digest their food more fully than others. It is found that in the act of chewing the cud, a large portion of the poisonous properties of noxious plants eaten by them, passes off by the salivary glands. This power of secreting the poisonous priestly vestments along with' them, was a sign of their being polluted by the sin of their irreligious wearers ; aud the remembrance of so appalling a judgment could not toll to strike a salutary fear into the liearts botli of priests and people. 6. uncover not your heads—They wlio were ordered to carry out the two bodies, being engaged Intheir sacred duties were forbidden to remove their turbans,

Id conformity with the usual customs of mourning; and the prohibition, " neither rend your garments," was in all probability, confined also to their official costume. For at other times the priests wore the ordinary dress of tlieir countrymen, and, in common with their families, miglit Indulge their private feelings by the usual signs or expressions of grief. 8-11. Do not drink wine nor strong drink—This prohibition, and the accompanying admonitions, following Immediately the occurrence of so fatal a catastrophe, has given rise to an opinion entertained by many, that the two unhappy priests were under the influence of Intoxication when they committed the offence Which was expiated only by their lives. But such an ett'ects of vegetables, is said to be particularly i-emarkablo in cows and goats, whose mouths are often sore, and sometimes bleed, in consequence. Their flesh is therefore in a better state for food, as it containsmore of the nutritious juices, and is more easily digested in the human stomach, and is consequently more easily assimilated. Animals which do not chew the cud, convert their food less perfectly; their flesh is tlierefore unwholesome, from the gross animal juices with which they abound, and Is apt to produce scorbutic and scrofulous disorders. But the animals that may be eaten are those which "part the hoof as well as chew the cud," and this is another means of freeing the flesh of the animal from noxious substances. "In the case of animals with parted hoofs, when feeding in unfavourable situations a prodigious iamount of foetid matter is discharged, and passes oir between the toes; while animals with undivided hoofs, feeding on the same ground, become severely affected in the legs, from the poisonous plants among the pasture." [Whitlaw's Code of Health.] All experience attests this, and accordingly the use of ruminating animals, that is, which both chew the cud and part the hoof, has always obtained in most countries, tliough it was observed most carefully by the people who were favoured with the promulgation of God's law. 4. the camel—It does to a certain extent divide tlie hoof, for tlie foot consists of two large p.arts, but tlie division is not complete; the toes rest upon an elastic pad on which the animal goes; as a beast of burden its llesh is tough, and an additional reason for its prohibition might be to keep the Israelites apart from the descendants of Islimael. 5. the coney—not the rabbit, for it is not found in Palestine or Arabia, but the liyrax, a little animal of the size and general shape of the rabbit, but differing from it in several essential features; it has no tail, singular long hairs bristling, like thorns, amongst the fur on its back; its feet are bare, its nails flat and round, except those on each inner toe of the hind feet, which are sharp and project like an awl. It does not burrow in the gi ound, but frequents the clefts of rocks. 6. the hare—Two siiecies of hare must have been pointed at, the Sinai hare—the hare of the desert, small and generally Itrown, the other, the hare of Palestine and Syria, about the size and appearance of that known In our own country. Neitlier the hare nor the coney are really ruminating. They only appearto be so from working the jaws on the grasses they live on. They are not cloven-footed, and besides it is said that from the great quantity of down upon them, they are very much subject to vermin—that in order to expel these, they eat poisonous plants, and if used as food while In that state, they are most deleterious. [WhjtLAW.] T. the g«lne—It is a filthy, foul-feeding animal, and It wants one of the natural provisions for purifying the system, " it cheweth not the cud ;" In hot climates in-

Idea, though the presumption is in its favour, is nothing more than conjecture. 1J4-15. Moses spake unto Aaron,

&.C.—This was a timely and considerate rehearsal of tlie laws that regulated the conduct of the priests. Amid the distractions of their family bereavement, Aaron and his surviving sons might have forgotten or overlooked some of their duties. 16-aO. Moses diligently sought the goat of the sin offering, and, behold, it was burnt—In a sacrifice presented, as that had been, on behalf of the people, it was the duty of the priests, as typically representing thefn and bearing their sins, to have eaten the flesh, after the blood had been sprinkled upon the altar. Instead of using it, however, for a sacred feast, tliey had burnt it without the camp; and Moses, who discovered this departure from the prescribed ritual, probably from a dread of some farther chastisements, challenged—not Aarou, whose heart was too much lacerated to bear a new cause of distress—but his two surviving sons in tlie priesthood for the great irregularity. Their father, however, who heard the charge, and by whose directions the error had been committed, hastened to give the explanation. The Import of his apology is, that all the duty pertaining to the presentation of the offering had been duly and sacredly performed, except the festive part of the observance, which privately devolved upon the priest and his fenuly; and that this had been omitted, either because hts heart was too dejected to join In the celebration of a cheerful feast, or that he supposed, from the appalling judgments that had been inflicted, the whole services of that occasion were so vitiated that he did not compile them. Aaron was decidedly in the wrong. By the express command of God, the sin of Tering was to be eaten in the holy place; and no fanciful view of expediency or propriety ought to have led him to dispense at discretion with a positive statute. The law of God was clear, and where that is the case. It Is sin to deviate a hair's breadth from the path of duty. But Moses sympathized with his deeply afflicted brother; and having pointed out the error, said no more.

CHAPTER XI.

Ver. 1-47. Beasts that may and may not be Eaten.

1. the Irfsrd spake unto Mosea and to Aaron—These laws being addressed to both the civil and ecclesiastical rulers in Israel, may serve to Indicate the twofold view that Is to be taken of them. Undoubtedly the first and strongest reason for instituting a distinction among meats, was to discourage the Israelites from sprcailing Into other countries, and from general Intercourse with the world—to prevent them acquiring familiarity with the inhabitants of the countries bordering on Canaan, so

Reast» thai may LEVITICUS XI. and may not be Eulen.

known to tlie Israelites, and so rendered hy.tbe Spptua!;i7>t (Deuteronomy 14. 16; Isaiah 3-1. 11): according to Parkhurst, the bittern, but not determined, tlie swanfound in great numbers in all the countries of the Levant, and frequents marshy places—the vicinity of rivers and lakes. It was held sacfed by the Egyptians, and kept tame within the precincts of heathen temples. It was probably oh this account chiefly its use. as food was prohibited. MiCHAELlS considers it the goose, the pelican —remarkable for the bag or pouch under its lower jaw which serves not only as a net to catch, but also as a receptacle of, food. It is solitary in its habits, and, like other large aquatic birds, often flies to a great distance from its favourite haunts, the gier eagle—Being here associated with waterfowl, it has been questioned whether any species of eagle is referred . to. Some think, as the original name racham denotes tenderness, affection, the halcyon or king-fisher is Intended. [Calmkt.] Others that it is the bird now called the rachami, a kind of Egyptian vulture, abundant in the streets of Cairo, and popularly called Pharaoh's fowl. It is white in colour, in size like a raven, and feeds on carrion; it is one of the foulest and filthiest birds in the world, the stork—a bird of benevolent temper, and held in the highest estimation In all Eastern countries; it was declared unclean, probably, from its feeding on serpents and other venomous dulgenoe in svi:2e's flesh is particularlj' liable to proiluee leprosy, scurvy, and various cutaneous erupti(jns. It was therefore strictly avoided by tlie Israelites, and its prohibition was further necessary to prevent their adopting many of the gi ossest idolatries practised by neiglibouring nations. 9. Tliese stiall ye eat . . . wliatsoever liatU fills and scales—"Tlie fins and scales are the means by which the excrescences of fisli are carried off, the same as m animals by perspiration. I have never known an instance of disease produced bv eating such fish ; but those that have no fins and scales cause, In hot climates, the most malignant disorders when eaten; in many cases they prove a mortAl poison." [Whitlaw.] 13. Whatsoever Iiath no fins nor scales, &c.—Under this classification frogs, eels, shell-flsli of all descriptions, were included as unclean, " many of the latter (shell-fish) enjoy a reputation they do not deserve, and have, when plentifully partaken of, produced effects which have led to a suspicion of their containing something of a poisonous nature." 13-19. these are tliey -n-liich ye shall have In abomination among the fowls—All birds of prey are particularly ranked in tlie class unclean; all those which feed on flesh and carrion ; no less than twenty species of birds, all probably then known, are mentioned under this category, and the inference follows that all which are not mentioned were allowed, that is, fowls which subsist on vegetable substances. From our imperfect knowledge of the natural history of Palestine, Arabia," and the contiguous countries, it is not easy to determine exactly what some of the prohibited birds are; although they must have reptiles, as well as rearing its young on the same food, the heron—the word so translated only occurs in the prohibited list of food and has been variously rendered—the crane, the plover, the woodcock, the parrot. In this great diversity of opinion nothing' certain can be affirmed regarding it, and as from the group witli which it is class-

been all well known among the people to whom these laws were given. tJie ossifrage Hebrew, bone-breaker, rendered in the Septuagint g-riffon, supposed to be the GypcBtos barbatus, the Lammer Geyer of the Swiss—a bird of the eagle or vulture species, inhabiting the higliest mountain-ranges in Western Asia as well as Europe, and pursues as its prey the chamois, ibex, or marmot, among rugged cliffs, till it drives them over a precipice— ified, it must be an aquatic bird that is meant, it may as well be the heron as any other bird, the more especially as herons abound in Egypt and in the Hauran of Palestine, the lapwing—or hoopoe—found in warm regions, a very pretty but filthy species of bird, and was considered unclean, probably from its feeding on insects, worms, and snails, the bat—the great or Ternat bat, known in the East, noted for Its voracity and fllthiness. 20. All fowls that creep, &c.—By " fowls " here are to be understood all creatures with wings, and by "going upon tlius obtaining the name of " bone-breaker." the ospray —the black eagle, among the smallest, but swiftest and strongest of its kind, the vulture—the word so rendered in our version means more probably " the kite" or "glede," and describes a varying but majestic flight, exactly that of the kite, which now darts forward with the rapidity all fours," not a restriction to animals which liave exactly four feet, because many " creeping things" have more tlinn that number. The prohibition is regarded generally m extending to insects, reptiles, and worms. 31. Yet these may ye cat of every Hying creeping thing that goetb npoii all four, which have legs above their feet Nothing short of a scientiflc description could convey more accurately the nature "of the locust after its kind." They were allowed as lawful food to the Israelites, and they are eaten by the Arabs, who fry them in olive oil ; or when sprinkled with salt, dried, smoked, and fried, they are said to taste not unlike red herrings. 26. cvt-ry beast of an arrow, now rests motionless on its expanded wings in the air: it feeds on small birds, insects, and fish, the kite—the vulture. In Egypt, and perhaps in the adjoining countries also, the kite and vulture are often seen together flying in company, or busily pursuing their foul but important oflice of devouring the carrion and relics Of putrefying flesh, which might otherwise pollute tlie atmosphere, after his klnd. e., the prohibition against eating it extended to the whole species, the raven—influding the crow, the pie. the owl—It is generally supposed the ostrich is denoted by the original word, the night-hawU—a very small bird, with wliich, from Its nocturnal habits, many superstitious Ideas were asso-. . . not cloven-footed—The prohibited animals under tlris description Include not only the beasts which have a single hoof, as horses and asses, but those also which divided the foot Into paws, as lions, tigers, Ac. 39. the weasel—rather, the mole, the mouse—fi'om Its diminutive size is placed among the reptiles instead of the quadrupeds, the tortoise—a lizard, resembling very nearly in shape, and in the hard pointed scales of the tail, the shake' ciated, the cuckoo-evidently some other bird is meant by the original term, from Its being ranged among rapacious birds. Dk. Shaw thinks it Is the safsaf; but that being a graminivorous and gregarious bird, is equally objectionable. Others think that the term the sea-mew, or some of the small spa-fowl, are Intended, the hawk— The Hebrew word Includes every variety of tlie falcon family — as the gos-hawk, the jer-hawk, the sparrowhawk, &c. Several species of hawks are found in Western Asia and Egypt, where they find Inexhaustible prey tail. 30. the ferret—the Hebrew word is thought by soma to signify tlie newt or chameleon, by others the frog, the chameleon—called by the Arabs the warral, a green lizard, the snail-a lizard which lives In the sand, and !

called by the Arabs c/iuica, of an azure colour, the mole— another species of lizard Is meant, probably the chameleon. 31-35. whosoever doth touch them, wlieii . . . dead, shall be unclean until the even—These regulations must have often caused annoyance, by suddenly requiring the exclusion of people from society, as well as the ordinances of religion. Nevertheless they were extremely

In the immense numbers of pigeons and turtle-doves that abound in those quarters. The hawk was held pre-eminently .sacred among the Egyptians; and this, besides Its rapacious disposition and gross habits, might have been a strong reason for its prohibition as an article of food to the Israelites, the little owl—or horned owl, as some render It. The common barn owl, which Is well known useful and salutary, especially as enforcing attention to cleanliness. This Is a matter of essential Importance 111 the East, where venomous reptiles often creep Into houses, and are found lurking In hox(\s, vessels, or holes In the wall ; and the carcass of one of them, or a dead mouse.

In the East. It Is the only bird of the kind here referred to, although the word la thrice mentioned In our version, cormorant—supposed to be the gull, the great €»wl— ccordtng to some, the Ibis of the Egyptians. It was wel. 80

BIRDS MENTIONED IN THE BIBLE.

The Laws and Tokens LEVITICUS XII, XIII. in Discerning Leprosy.

tlan bondage. It appears that, in consequence of the'^fc hardships, there was, even after they had left Egypt, a general predisposition among the Hebrews to the contagious forms of leprosy—so that it often occurred as a consequence of various other affections of the skin. And hence all cutaneous blemishes or blains—especially such as had a tendency to terminate in leprosy—were watched with a Jealous eye from the first. [Goon's Study of Medimole, lizard, or other unclean animal, might' be inadvertently touclied by the hand, or fall on clothes, skin-bottles, or any article of common domestic use. By connect-

Ing, tlierefore, the touch of such creatures with ceremonial defilement, which required immediately to be removed, an effectual means was taken to prevent the bad effects of venom and all unclean or noxious mattei'. 47. mafce a dlflfence between tlie unclean and tl»c clean i.e., between animals used and not used for food. It is probcine.'] A swelling, a pimple, or bright spot on tlie skin, created a strong ground of suspicion of a man's being attacked by the dreaded disease, then lie shall be brouglit unto Aaron the priest, &c.—Like the Egyptian priests, the Levites united the character of physii'ian with that of the sacred office; and on the appearance of any suspicious eruptions on the skin, the person having

Blile tliat the laws contained in this chapter were not entirely new, but only gave the sanction of Divine enactment to ancient usages. Some of the prohibited animals have, on pliysiological grounds, been everywhere I'ejected by the general sense or experience of manltind, while others may have been declared unclean from their unwholesomeness in warm countries, or from some reasons, which are now imperfectly known, connected with contemporary Idolatry.

these was brought before the priest—not, however, to receive medical treatment, though it is not improbable that some purifying remedies might be prescribed, but to be examined with a view to those sanitary precautions which it belonged to legislation to adopt. 3-6. tlie priest shall look on the plague in the skin of the flesh, &c.— The leprosy, as covering tlie person with a white scaly scurf, has always been accounted an oftensive blemish rather than a serious malady in the East, unless when it assumed its less common and malignant forms. When a Hebrew priest, after a careful inspection, discovered under the cutaneous blemisli the distinctive signs of contagious leprosy, the person was immediateljpronounced unclean, and is supposed to have been sent out of the camp to a lazaretto provided for that purpose. If the symptoms appeared to be doubtful, he ordered the person to be kept in domestic confinement for seven days, when he was subjected to a second examination; and if during the previous week the eruption liad subsided or appeared to be harmless, he was instantly discharged. But if tlie .eruption continued unabated and still doubtful, he was put under surveillance anotlier week ; at the end of whii h the character of the disorder never failed to manifest

CHAPTER XII.

Ver. 1-8. "Woman's Uncleanness by Ciiild-Birth. S. If a woman, &c.—The mother of a boy was ceremonially unclean for a week, at the end of which the child was circumcised (Genesis 17. 12; Romans 4. 11-13); the mother of a girl for two weeks—a stigma on tlie sex (1 Timothy 2.

li, 15) for sin, which was removed by Christ; every one who came near her during that time contracted a similar defilement. After these periods, visitors miglit approach her, though she was still excluded from tlie public ordinances of religion. 6-8. tlie days of lier purifying Though the occasion was of a festive cliaracter, yet the eacriflces appointed were not a peace offering, but a burnt offering and sin offering, in order to impress tlie mind of the parent witli recollections of the origin of sin, and that the child inherited a fallen and sinful nature. The offerings were to be presented the day after the period of her separation had ended i. e., forty-first for a boy, eightyfirst for a girl, toring two turtles, &c.—(See on ch. 5. 7). This was the offering made by Mary, the mother of Jesus, and it affords an incontestable proof of the poor and humble condition of the family (Luke 2. 22-24).

itself, and he was either doomed to perpetual exclusion from society, or allowed to go at large. A person wlio had thus been detained on suspicion, when at length set at liberty, was obliged to " wasii his clothes," as having been tainted by ceremonial pollution; and tlie purification through which he was required to go was, in tlie spirit of the Mosaic dispensation, symbolical of that inward purity

CHAPTEE XIII.

Ver. 1-59. The Laws and Tokens in Discern in o leprosy. 3. When a man shall have In the skin, &c.—The £act of the following rules for distinguishing the plague of leprosy being incorporated with the Hebrew code of laws, proves the existence of the odious disease among that people. But a short time, little more than a year, if so long a period had elapsed since the exodus, when symptoms of leprosy seem extensively to have appeared among them ; and as they could not be very liable to such a cutaneous disorder amid their active journeyings, and in the dry open air of Arabia, the seeds of the disorder must have been laid in Egypt, where it lias always been endemic. There is every reason to believe that this was the case: that the leprosy was not a family complaint, hereditary among the Hebrews, but that they got it from intercourse with the Egyptians, and from the unfavourable circumstances of their condition in the house of bondage. The great excitement and irritability of the skin In the hot and sandy regions of the East, produce a far greater predisposition to leprosy of all kinds than in the cooler temperature of Europe ; and cracks or blotches. Inflammations or even contusions of the skin, very often lead to these in Arabia and Palestine to some extent, but particularly In Egypt. Besides, the subjugated and distressed state of the Hebrews in the latter country, and the nature of their employment, must have rendered them very liable to this as well as to various otV ,r blemishes and mlsaffections of the skin ; In the prodr ,tlon of which tliere are no causes more active or powerful than a depressed state of body and mind, hard labour under a burning sun, the body constantly covered with the excoriating dust of brickfields, and an Impoverished diet—to all of whlcli the Israelites were exposed whilst under the Egypit was instituted to promote. 7,8. But if tlie scab spread much abroad in the skin—Tliose doubtful cases, when they assumed a malignant cliaracter, appeared in one of two forms, apparently according to the particular constitution of the skill or of the habit generally. The one was "somewhat dark" i. e., the obscure or dusky leprosy, in which the natui-al colour of the hair, which in Egypt and Palestine is black, is not changed, as is repeatedly said in the sacred code, nor is there any depression in the dusky spot, while the patches, instead of keeping stationary to their first size, are perpetually enlarging their lioimdary. The patient labouring under this form was pronounced; unclean by the Hebrew priest or physician, and hereby sentenced to a separation from his family and friends a decisive proof of Its being contagious. 9-37. if tUe< rising be white—This hkight white leprosy is the mc»fc malignant and Inveterate of all the varieties the disease exhibits, and it was marked by tlie following dlstinctiv© signs:—A glossy white and spreading scale, upon an elevated base, the elevation depressed in tlie middle. bnt without a change of colour; the black hair cn the patches participating In the whiteness, and the scaly patches themselves perpetually enlarging their boundary. Several of these characters, taken separatelj', belong toother blemishes of the skin as well ; so that none of theiu. was to be taken alone, and It was only when the whole of them concurred that tlie Jewish priest, in his c.ap«icity of physician, was to pronounce the disease a maligniuil leprosy. If it spread over the entire frame without producing any ulceration, 1 1 lost its contagious power by degrees ; or in other words, ran thnnign its course and -exhausted.

Itself. In that case, there being no Ioniser any fear of further evil, either to the individual hians»lf or to the' 8i

Tlii' Linrs a d Tolcens LEVITICUS XIV in Discei-ning Leproty.

apt to breed infections vermin, which, being settled in the commmiity, t!ie patlPi t was declared clean by the priest, while the dry scales vera yet upon him, and restored to stuff, would imperceptibly gnaw it, and leave stains similar to those described by Moses. It is well known tliat the wool of sheep dying of disease, if it had not been society. If, oil the contrary, the patches ulcerated, and ^uick oi fung lus flesh sprung up in them, the purulent matter oi wh ch, if brought into contact with the skin of other persons, wouhl be taken into tlie constitution by means of absorbent vessels, the priest was at once to pronounce it an i:iveterate leprosy ; a temporary confinement was declared to be totally unnecessary, and he was regarded as unclean for life. [Dr. Good.] Other skin affecsliorn from the animal wliile living, and also skins, if not thoroughly prepared by scouring, are lial)le to the effecls described in this passage. The stains are described as of a greenish or reddish colour, according, perhaps,*to the colour or nature of the ingredients used in preparing them; for acids convert blue vegetable colours into red, and alkalies change then into green. [Bkown.] It appears, then, that the leprosy, though sometimes inflicted as a miraculous judgment (Numbers 12. 10; 2 Kings 5, 27), was a natural disease, whicli is knoM U in Eastern countions, which had a tendency toterminatein leprosy, though they were not decided symptoms when alone, were (v. 18-

2.3) "a boil," and (d. 24-28) "a hot burning" i.e., a fiery inflammation or carbuncle, and (v. 29-37) "a dry scall," when the leprosy was distinguished by being in sight deeper than the skin, and the hair became thin and yeltries still; wliile the rules prescribed by tiie Hebrew legislator for distinguishing the true character and varieties of the disease, .and which are far superior to tlie method of treatment now followed in those regions, show the Divine wisdom liy which he was guided. Doubtless the origin of the disease is owing to some latent causes in nature; and perhaps a more extended acquaintance with the archeology of Egypt, and the natural history of the adjacent countries, may confirm the opinion that (he leprosy results from noxious insects or a putrid ftumentalow. 38, 39. If a man . . . or a woman have in the skin of their flesh bright spots—This modification of the leprosy is distinguished by a dull white colour, and it is entirely a cutaneous disorder, never injuring the eon-

Btitution. It is described as not penetrating below the skin of the flesh, and as not rendering necessary an exclusion from society. It is evident, then, this common form of leprosy is not contagious, otherwise Moses wovild have prescribed as strict a quarantine in this as in the other cases. And hereby we see the great superiority of the Mosaic law, which so accurately distinguished the charaction. But whatever the origin or cause of the disease, the laws enacted by Divine authority regarding it, while they pointed in the first instance to sanitary ends, were at the same time intended, by stimulating to carelulne*8 against ceremonial defilement, to foster a spirit of religious fear and inward purity.

ters of the leprosy, and preserved to societ.v the services of those who were laboring under the uncontagious forms of the disease, over the customs and regulations of Eastern countries in the present day, wliere all lepers are indiscriminately proscribed, and are avoided as unfit for free intercourse with their fellow-m n. 40, 41. bald . . . forehead bald—The falling off of the hair is another symptom which creates a suspicion of leprosy, when the

CHAPTER XIV.

Ver. 1-57. The Rites and Sacrifices in Cleansing OF THE Leper. 2. law of the leper in tl»c day of hia cleansing—Though quite convalescent, a leper was not allowed to return to society immediately and at his own baldness commences in the back part of the head. But itwas not of itself a decisive sign unless when taken in connection with other tokens; a "sore of a reddish wliite colour ;" and the Hebrews as well as other Orientals were accustomed to distinguish between the forehead baldness, which miglit be natural, and that baldness which might be t!ie consequence of disease. 4.5. the leper in whom the |,]ague is. his elotlies shall be rent, <?cc.—The person wlio was declared afrected with the leprosy forthwith exhibited all the tokens of suffering from a heavjcalamity. Rending garments and uncovering the head were common signs of mourning. As to "the putting a covering upon the upper lip," that means either wearing a moustache, as the Hebrews used to sh.ave the upper lip [Cai,- MET], or simply keeping a hand over it. All these external marks of grief wore Intended to proclaim. In addition to his own exclamation "unclean!" that the person was a leper, whose company every one must shun. 4fl. he shall dwell alone ; without the camp—in a laz.aretto by I.Mnself, or associated with other lepers (2 Kings 7. 3, 8). 47-51>, Tlie garment . . . tlnat the . . . leprosy is in—It will. The malignant character of his disease rendered t.'>e greatest precautions necessary to liis re-admission amongst the people. One of the priests most skilled in the diagnostics of disease [Gkotius], being deputed toftt,- tend such outcasts, the restored leper conipeeied before tills oflicial, and when alter examination a certificate of health was given, the ceremonies here described were forthwith observed outside the camp. 4. two bii-ds—?»^, sparrows. The Sepiuagint, however, renders the expression "little birds;" and it is evident that it is to be taken in this generic sense from their being specified as "clean —a condition which would have been altogether superfluous to mention in reference to sparrows. In all tlie ollerings prescribed in the law, Moses ordered only common and accessible birds; and lienpe we may presume that he points here to such birds as sparrows or pigeons, as in the desert it might have been very dil Uciilt to procure wild birds alive, cedar wood, and scarlet, aikd liys Kop—The cedar hero meant was certainly not the famous tree of lA'banon, and It is generally supposed to have been the juniper, as several varieties of that shrub are found growing abundantly in the clefts and crevices of the Hlnaitlc mountains. A stick of this shrub was l)ound to a bunch of hyssop by a scarlet riblion, and the living bird was to be so attached to it, that when they dipped the branches in the water, the t:iil of the bird might al.so be moistened, but not tlio head nor the wings, that It might not he Impeded in its flight when is well known that infectious diseases—such as scarlet fever, measles, the plague—are latently imbibed and carried by the clothes, liut the language of this passage clearly Indicates a disease to which clothes themselves were subject, and which was followed by eflccts on them analogous to those which malignant leprosy produces on the human body—for similar regulations were made for the rigid insi)ection of suspected garmen's by a priest as for ttie examination of a leprous person. It has long been conjectured, and recently ascertained by the use of a lens, that the leprous condition of swine is produced by myriads of minute insi'cts engendered in theirskln; and regnriling let loose. 5. titc priest shall command tlint one of tlie birds be killed . . . over runiking water— .\s tho blood of a single bird would not have been sullicient to immerse the body of another bird. It was nilngle<l with sjiring water to Increase the quantity necessiiry for the appointed sprinklings, which were to lie repeated all leprosy as of the same nature. His thought that this at Tords IX sulllclent rcason for the Injunction In the Mosaic law to destroy the clothes in which the disease, after careful observation, seemed to manifest Itself. (Uothes are Bomi tluies Hceij contaminated by this disease in the West seten times, denoting a complete pviriflcaf Ion. (S»>e 2 Kings 5.10; P.salm51. 2; Matthew 8.1; I.uke .'"). 1 1). Tl o living bird being then set free, in token of the leper's release from quarantine, the priest pronounced him clean; and this oflicial drclaration was made with all soleninlty, in order both that the mind of the leper might be duly Impressed with a sense of the Divine goodness, and Hiut

Indies and the southern parts of America [Wuiti.aw'h Code of IleuUU], ixnd It may be presumed that jistlie Hebrews were llvilng In the desert, where they ha.1 not the convenience of frequent changes and washing, the clothes Uijy wore, and thc Hkln mats on which they lay,would be

The RiUs znd Sacrifices LEVITICUS XV. in Cleansing of (he Leper.

contagion of leprous occupiers; or that the leprosy was in the house itself. It is evident that the latter was (he true state of the case, from the furniture being removed out of others might be satisfied they misiit safely hold intercourse with lilm. Sevei-al other purifications had to be gone tljrougli during a series of seven days, and the whole process had to be repeated on the seventh, ere he was allowed to re-enter tlie camp. The circumstance of a priest being employed seems to imply that instruction suitable it on the first suspicion of disease on the walls. Some have supposed that the name of leprosy was analogically applied to it by the Hebrews, as we speak of cancer in trees, when they exhibit corrosive effects similar to what the disease so named produces on the human body ; while others have pronounced it a mural efflorescence, or species of mildew on the wall, apt to be produced in very damp situations, and which was followed by effects so injurious to health, as well as to the stability of a house, particularly In warm countries, as to demand the attention of a legislator. Moses enjoined the priests to follow the same course and during the same period of time lor ascertaining the true character of this disease as in human leprosy to the newly-recovered leper would be given, and that the symbolical ceremonies used in the process of cleansing leprosy would be explained. How far tliey were then understood we cannot tell. But we can trace some instructive analogies between the leprosy and the disease of sin, and between the rites observed in the process of cleansing. leprosy and the provisions of the gospel. The chief of these analogies are, that as it was only when a leper exhibited a certain change of state that orders were given by the priest for a sacrifice, so a sinner must be in the exercise of faith and penitence ere the benefits of the gospel remedy can be enjoyed by him. The slain bird and the bird let loose are supposed to typify, the one the death and the other the resurrection of Christ ; wliile the sprinkin case of being found leprous, to remove the infected parts, or If afterwards there appeared a risk of the contagion spreading, to destroy the house altogether, and remove the materials to a distance. The stones were probably rough, unhewn stones, built up witliout cement, in the manner now frequently used in fences, and plastered over, or else laid in mortar. The oldest examples of a rchitecture are of this character. The very same thing has to be done still with houses infected with mural salt. The stones covered witli the nitrous incrustation must be removed, and if the infected wall Is suffered to remain, it must be plastered all over anew. '48-57. the priest slinll pronounce the house clean, l;ecause the plague is healed—The precautions here described show that there lings on him that had been leprous typified the requirements which led a believer to cleanse himself from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, and to perfect his holiness in the fear of the Lord. 10-30. on the ciglith clayhe shall take two he-lambs without blemish, niid one ewe-lamb of the tlrst year witlioiit blemish—The purification of the leper was not completed till at tlie end of seven days, after the ceremonial of the birds, and during which, though permitted to come into the camp, he had to tarry abroad out of his tent, from which he came daily is great danger in warm countries from the house leprosy, which was likely to be increased by the smallness and rude architecture of the houses in the early ages of the Israelitisli history. As a house could not contract any impurity in the sight of God, the "atonement" wliith the priest was to make for it must either have a reference to the sins of its occupiers, or to the ceremonial process ap- •pointed for itA 'ouriflcation, the very same as that observed for a leprous person. This solemn declaration that It was "clean," as well as the offering made on the occasion, was admirably calculated to make known the to appear at the door of the tabernacle with the offerings required. He was presented before the Lord by the priest that made him clean. And hence it has always been reckoned amongst pious people the first duty of a patient newly restored from a long and dangerous sickness to repair to the church to offer his thanksgiving, where his body and soul, in order to be an acceptable offering, must be presented by our great Priest, whose blood alone makes any clean. The offering was to consist of tliree lambs, three tenth-deals, or decimal parts, of an ephah of fine flour (two pints = and one log {half pint) of oil (eh. 2. 1). One of the lambs was for a trespass offering, which was necessary from the inherent sin of his nature, or from his defilement of the camp by his leprosy previous to his expulsion ; and it is remarkable that the blood of the trespass offering was applied exactly in the same particular manner to the extremities of the restored leper, as that of the ram in the consecration of the priests. The parts sprinkled with this blood were then anointed witli fact, to remove apprehension from the public mind, as well as relieve tlie owner from the aching suspicion of dwelling in an infected house.

CHAPTER XV.

Ver. 1-18. Uncleanness of Men. 2. When any man hath a running issue—This chapter describes other forms of uncleanness, the nature of which is sufficiently intelligible in the text without any explanatory comment. Being the effects of licentiousness, they properly come within the notice of the legislator, and the very stringent rules here prescribed both for the sejjaration of the person diseased and for avoiding contamination from anything connected with him, were well calculated not only to prevent contagion, but to discourage the excesses of licentious indulgence. 9. what saddle ... he ridetit upon that hath the issue shall be uuclean—(See on Genesis 31.

oil—a ceremony which is supposed to have borne this spiritual import; that while the blood was a token of forgivenes.s, the oil was an emblem of healing—as the blood of Christ justifies, the influence of the Spirit sanctifies. Of the other two lambs the one was to be a sin ol Tering, and the other a burnt oflfering, which had also the character of a thank offering for God's mercy in liis restoration. And this was considered to make atonement " for him;" i. e.,it removed that ceremonial pollution which had excluded him from the enjoyment of religious ordinances, just as the atonement of Christ restores all who are <;leansed through faith in his sacrifice to the privileges of the children of God. 31-3'2. If he be poor, and cannot get HO much ; then he shall take one lamb—a kind and considerate provision for an extension of the privilege to lepers of the poorer class. The blood of their smaller offering wa-s to be applied in the same process of purification, and they were as publicly and conipletel.v cleansed as those who brought a costlier offering (Acts 10. 31). 34—ts. leprosy In a house—This law was prospective, not being to come Into operation till the settlement of the Israelites In Canaan. The words, "I put the leprosy," has led many to think that this plague was a judicial infliction from heaven for the sins of the owner; wliile others do not regard It in this light, it being common in Scripture to represent God as doing that which he only permits in UIh providence to be done. Assuming It to have lieen a natural disease, a new dif Uculty ari.ses as to whether we are to consider that the house had become infectel by the.34). m. the vessel of earth titat Ite touchrth witich hath the issue sltall l)c broken—It is thought the pottery of the Israelites, like the earthenware jars in which the Egyptians kept their water, was unglazed, and consequently porous, and that it was its porousness which, rendering it extremely liable to imbibe small particles of impure matter, was the reason of the vessel touched by an unclean person being ordered to be broken. 13, 1 i. then he sliall number lo himself seven days for lilii tleansln};—Like a l('i)rous person he underwent a week s proljation, whetlier he was completely liealed, and then with the sacrifices prescribed the priest nuide an atonement for him, i. c, oll'ered the oblations necessary for the removal of his ceremonial defilement, as well as t)ie typical pardon of his sins.

19-33. Uncleann less OF Women. 19. if a %voman have an issue—Though this, like the leprosy, might be a n.ilural affection, it v.'as anciently coiisidere<l contagious, an I entailed acerenu)nlal defilement which typified a mors,

IIow the Iliijh Priest mmt LEVITICUS XVI. enter into the IIo'ij Pluce.

impurity. This ceremonial defilement had to be removed hy an appointed method of ceremonial expiation, and the neglect of it subjected any one to tlie guilt of defiling tiie tabernacle, and to death as the penalty of profane temerpeople. The bullock (i'. 3) and the goat" were for sin offerings, and the rams for burnt offerings. The goats, though used in different ways, constituted only one oflering. They were both presented before the Lord, and the disposal of them determined by lot, which Jewish writers have thus described : The priest, placing one of the goats on his right hand, and the other on his left, took his station by the altar, and cast into an urn two pieces of gold exactly similar, inscribed, the one with the words "for the Lord," and the other for "Azazel" (the scapegoat). After having well shaken them together, he put both his hands into the box and took up a lot in each: that in his right hand he put on the head of the goat which stood on his right, and that in his left he dropt on the other. In this manner the fate of each was decided. 11-14. Aaron shall bring tlie bullock of the sin offering which is for himself, Ac—The first part of the service was designed to solemnize his own mind, as well aa the minds of the people, by offering the sacrifices for their sins. The sin oflerings beij.g slain had the sins of the ity. 31-33. Tliiis shall ye separate the cliildreit of Israel from tlieir nncleanucss—Tlie Divine wisdom was manifested in inspiring the Israelites with a profound reverence for holy things; and nothing was more suited to this purpose than to debar from tlie tabernacle all wlio were polluted by any kind of uncleanness, ceremonial as well as natural, mental as well as physical. The better to mark out that people as his family, his sei-vants and priests, dwelling in the camp as in a holy place, consecrated by His presence and His tabernacle. He required of them complete purity, and did not allow them to come before Him when defiled, even by Involuntary or secret Impurities, as a want of respect due to His majesty. And when we bear in mind that God was training up a people to live In His presence in some measure as priests devoted to His service, we shall not consider these rules for the maintenance of personal purity either too stringent or too minute (1 Thessalonians 4. 4).

ofl'erer judicially transferred to them by the imputation of his hands on their head (ch. 4.), and thus the young bullock, which was to make atonement for himself and the other priests (called his house. Psalm l;i5. 19) was killed by the hands of the high priest. While the blood of the victim was being received into a vessel, taking a censer of live co.als in his right hand, and a platter of sweet incense in his left, he, amid the solemn attention and the anxious prayers of the assembled multitude, crossed the porch and the holy place, opened the outer veil which led into the holy of holies, then the inner veil, and, standing before the ark, deposited the censer of coals on the floor, emptied the plate of incense into his hand, poured it on the burning coals, and the apartment was filled with fragrant smoke. Intended, according to Jewish writers, to prevent any presumptuous g.azer prying too curiously into the form of the mercy-seat, which was the Lord's

CHAPTER XVI.

Ver. 1-34. How the High Priest must Enter into THE Holy Place. 1. after the death of the two sons of Aaron, wlien they oifered before the Loi-d, and died—It is thought by some that this chapter has been transposed out of its right place in the sacred record, which was Immediately after tlie narrative of the deaths of Nadab and Abihu. That appalling catastrophe must have filled Aaron with painful apprehensions, lest the guilt of these two sons might be entailed on his house, or that other members of his family might share the same fate by some irregularities or defects in the discharge of their sacred functions. And, therefore, this law was established, by the due observance of whose requirements the Aaronic order would be securely maintained and accepted in the priesthood. 3. Speak unto Anron thy brother, that he come not at all times Into the holy plaee within the veil, &c.—Common priests went every day to burn incense on the golden altar into the part of the sanctuary xvilhout the veil. But none except the high priest was allowed to enter within the veil, and that only once a year with the greatest care and solemnity. This .arrangement was evidently designed to inspire .a reverence for the most holy jilace, and the precaution was necessary, at a time when the presence of God was indicated by sensible symbols, the impression of which might have been diminished or lost by daily and familiar observation. I win appear in the clond—j. c, the smoke of the Incense which the high priest l)nrnt on his yearly entrance into the most holy place: and this was the cloud which at that time covered the mercy-seat. 3, 4. Titus shall Aaron come into the holy plaee—As the duties of the great day of atonement led to the nearest and most solemn approach to God, the directions as to the proper course to be followed were minute .and special, wltlt

throne. The high priest having done this, perfumed t he sanctuary, returned to the door, took the blood of the slain bullock, and carrying it into the holy of holies, sprinkled it with his finger once upon the mercy-.seat "eastward," —i. c, on the side next to himself; and seven times "bofore the morcy-seat,"—i. c ., on the front of the ark. Leav • ing the coals and the incense burning, he went out a second time, to sacrifice at the altar of burnt otl'oring the goat which had been assigned as a sin ofl'ering for the people; and carrying Its blood into the holy of holies, made similar sprinklings as he had done before with the blood of the bullock. While the high priest w.as thus engaged in the most holy iilace, none of the ordinary priests were allowed to remain within the precincts of the tabernacle. The sanctuary or holy place, and the altar of burnt offering were in like manner sprinkled seven times with the blood of the bullock and the goat. The oliject of this solemn ceremonial was to Impress the minds of the Israelites with the conviction that the wliole tabernacle was stained by the sins of a guilty peojile, that by their sins they had forfeited the privileges of the Divine presence and worship, and that an atonement had to be made as the condition of God's remaining with them. 'J'hesins and shortcomings of the iiast year having polhited the sacred odilh'C, the t-xpiafion re(]ulied to be annually renewed. The exclusion of the priests Indicated their unworthlness, and the impurities of their service.

young Imllock . . . and a ram—These victims he brought alive, but they were not ofl'crcd In sacilflco till lie had gone through the ceremonies descriljcd Ix'twicu

111 is and the eUventh verse. He was not to attire himself on that occasion in the splendid robes that were proper to his sacred office, but in a plain dress of linen, like the common Levltes, for, as ho was then to make atonement

'J'he mingled blood of the two victims being sprinkled on tlu norus of the altar indicated that the priests and the people equally needed an atonement for their sins.

for his own sins, as well as for those of the pfojtio, he was to appear In the humble character of a supi)llant. That plain dress was more In harmony with a season of humiliation, as well as lighter and more convenient for the duties which on that occasion he had singly tx) peri'orm, than the gorgeous robes of the pontificate. It showed that when all appeared as sinners, the hlgliestand lowest were then on a level, and that tlicre Is no disltnctloii of persons with God. 5-10. vhall talte of tlie eon}{ref;ntion . . . two Itids of the goats . , , and one ram—The uacrlflces were to bo offened by the high jirlest respectively for lilinsclf and theother priests, as well as for the l!ut the sanctuary being thus ceremonially purified, and the people of Israel reconciled by the blood of the con.secrated victim, the Ijord continued to dwell In the midst of them, and honour them with his gra<'lous presence.

%0-'i't. he slinll bring the live Roal—Having already been presented before the I/C>ril (i'. 10), It was now brought forward to the high priest, who, placing his hands upon

Its head, and "having confessed over It all the Iniquities of the people of Israel, and all their transgressions In all their sins," transferred them by this act to the gont as their substitute. It was then delivered Into the

ANCIENT AND MODERN CENSEE8 AND PERFUME VESSELS.

Ancient Censer.— From Montfaucon. Ancient Incenss Bav.—From Montfaucon.

The Sacrificei and Ceremonies LEVITICUS XVII. 071 Euleriiig Ike Hooj Place, hauds of a person, who was appointed to lead lilm away Into a distant, sollUu-y, and desert place, wliere in early times lie was let go, to escape for his life, but in the time of Clirist, was carried to a higli rock twelve miles from Jerusalem, and there, being thurst over the precipice, he found in the strong addictedness of the Israelites to idolatry at the time of their departure from Egypt; and as it would have been easy for any by killing an animal to sacrifice privately to a favourite oljject of worsliip, a strict jirohibition was madeagaiiist their slauglitering at home. (See on Deuteronomy 12. 13.) 5. to the end that the cliilclr«n of Israel may bring their sacri Aces wliicli they ofier in the open tield—"They" is sujiposed Ijy some commentators to refer to the Egyptians, so that tlie verse will stand thus: "the children of Israel may bring their sacrifices which they (the Egyptians) offer in the open was killed. Commentators have difl'ered widely in their opinions about the chaa-acter and purpose of this part of tlie ceremouial; some considering the word A/.azel, with tiie LXX., and our translators, to mean, " tlie scapegoat ; " others, "a lofty, precipitous rock" [Bochart]; others, "a thing separated to God " [Ewai,d,Thoi.uckJ; while others think it designates Satan [Gesenius, Hengstenbei;g]. This last view is grounded on the idea of both goats forming one and the same sacrifice of atonement, and it is bupported by Zechariali 3., which presents a striking comn«eutary on this passage. Whether there was in this peculiar ceremony any reference to an Egyptian superstition about Typhon, the spirit of evil, inhabiting the wilderness, and the design was to ridicule it by sending a cursed animal Into his gloomy dominions, it is impossible field." The law is thought to have been directed against numbers whose Egyptian habits led them to imitate tliis idolatrous practice. 7. they shall no more ofter titeir sacrifices unto devils lit., "goats." The proliiljition evidently alludes to the worship of the hirei-footed kind, such as Pan, Faunus, and Saturn, whose recognized symbol was a goat. This was a form of idolatry enthusiastically practised by the Egyptians, particularly in the nome or province of Meudes. Pan was supposed especially to preside over mountainous and desert regions, and it was while they were iu the wilderness the to say. The subject is involved in much obscurity. But in any view there seems to be a typical reference to Christ who bore away our sins. 23-88. Aaron sliall come iuto

Israelites seem to have been powerfully influenced bj' a feeling to propitiate this idol. Moreover, t)|p ceremonies observed in this idolatrous worship were extremely licentious and obscene, and thegross impurity of the rites gives great point and significance to the expression of Moses, " they have gone a-whoring." 8, 9. Whatsoever man . . . offereth . . . and bringeth it not nnto tlie door of tlie tabericle—Before the promulgation of the law, men worshipped wherever they pleased or pitched their tents. But after that event the rites of religion could be acceptably performed only at the appointed place of worship. This restriction with respect to place was necessary as a preventive of idolatry; for it prohibited the Israelites, when at a distance, from repairing to the altars of the heathen, which were commonly in groves or fields. 10. 1 will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut htm off from among his people The face of God is often used in Scripture to denote His anger (Psalm 34.16; Revelation 6.16; Ezekiel 38. 18), and the manner in which God's face would be set against such an offender, was, that if tlie crime were public and known, he was condemned to death; it it were secret, vengeance would overtake him. (See on Genesis 9. 4.) But the practile tafceruacle of tlic congregation, anil sliall put off tl»e linen garments—On the dismissal of the scape-goat, the high priest prepared for the important parts of the service which still remained ; and for the pei formance of these lie laid aside his plain linen clothes, and having bathed himself in water, he assumed his pontifical dress. Thus gorgeously attired, he went to present the burnt offerings which were prescribed for himself and the people, consisting of the two rams which had been brought with the sin offerings, but reserved till now. The fat was ordered to be burnt upon the altar ; the rest of the carcasses to be cut down and given to some priestly attendants to burn without the camp, in conformity witli the genei'al law for the sin offerings (ch. 4. 8-12; 8. 14-17). The persons employed in burning them, as well as the conductor of tlie ecape-goat, were obliged to wash their clothes and bathe their flesh in water before they were allowed to return Into the camp. 29-34. this shall be a statute for ever nnto you, that in the seventh montli, on tike tenth day of the month, ye shall aiilict your souls—This day of annual expiation for all the sins, irreverences and impurities of all classes in Israel during the previous year, was to be observed as a solemn fast, in which " they were to afflict their souls ;" it was reckoned a saljbatli—kept as a season of " holy convocation," or assembling for religious purposes, and the persons who performed any labour were subject to the penalty of death. It took place on the tenth day of the seventh month, corresponding to our third of October, and this chapter, together with ch.

tice against which the law is here pointed was ftn idolatrous rite. The Zablans, or worshippers of the heavenly host, were accustomed, in saci'ificing animals, to pour oi> the blood, and eat a part of the flesh at tlie place where tl e blood was poured out, and sometimes the blood itself, believing that by means of it, friendship, brotlierliood, and familiarity were contracted between the worshippers aiic' the deities. They, moreover, supposed that the blood wan very beneficial in oljtaiiiing for them a vision of the demon during their sleep, and a revelation of future events. The prohibition against eating blood, viewed in the light of this historic commentary, and unconnected with the peculiar terms in which it is expressed, seems to have been levelled against idolatrous practices, as is still liirther evident from Ezekiel 33. 25, 26; 1 Corinthians 10. 20, 21. H. the life of the flesli is in the blood; and I linve given it to you xipon the altar, to make an aJoiieiaeiit for your souls—God, as the sovereign author and propri-

23. 27S2, as containing special allusion to the observances of the day, were publicly read. The rehearsal of these passages appointing the solemn ceremonial was very appropriate, and the details of the successive parts of it—above all the spectacle of the public departure of the scape-goat under tlie care of Its leader, must have produced salutary Impressions both of sin and of duty that would not be soon effaced.

CHAPTER XVII.

Ver. 1-18. Blood of Beasts must be Offered at the Tabernacle Door. 3. What man . . . killeth an ox— Tlie Israelites, like other people living in tlie desert, wo'.ild not make Jiiucli use of animal food, and when they did kill a lamb or a kid for food, it would almost always be, as iu Abraham's entertainmentof the angels, an occasion of a feast, to be eaten in company. This was what was done with the peace offerings, and accordingly it is here enacted, that the same course sliall be followed in rluua,htering the animals as in the case of those offm-ings, etor of nature, reserved the blood to himself, ami allowed men onlj' one use of it—in the way of sacrifices. 13, 11. whatsoever man . . . hunteth— It was customary with heathen sportsmen, when they killed any game or venison, to pour out the blood as a libation to the god of ifie chase. The Israelites, on the contrary, were enjoiiii'U, instead of leaving it exposed, to cover it with dust, and, by this means, were efl'ectually debarred from all the superstitious uses to which the heathen apiilied it. l.">, 10. every soul that eatetik that wlilclt dietii of itxelil" (i :.'iodus 2-2. 31; ch. 11.30; Acts 1."). 2(1), be unclean until the even—i.e., from tlie moment of his discovering his fault,

VIZ., that they should be killed publicly, and after being Jevoted to God, partaken of by the offerers. This law, it

Is obvious, could only be observable In the wilderness, v'hile the people were encamped within an accessilile dis Uvuce from the tabernacle. The reason of it is to be until the evening. This law, however, was binding oniy on an Israelite. (See Deuteronomy 14.21.)

Unlawful MarriageK LEVITICUS XVIII. Unlawful Lusts.

CHAPTER XVIII.

then the infants were either shaken over the flames, or passed through the ignited arms, by way of lustration to ensure the favour of the pretended deity. The fire-worshippers asserted that all children who did not undergo this purifying process would die in infancy; and the influence of this Zabian superstition was still so extensively prevalent in the days of Moses, that the Divine lawgiver judged it necessary to prohibit it by an express statute, neither slialt tlion profane like name of thy God—by giving it to false or pretended divinities; or, perhaps, from this precept standing in close connection with the worship of Molech, the meaning rather is. Do not, by devoting your children to him, give foreigners occasion to blaspheme the name of your God as a cruel and sanguinary deity, who demands the sacrifice of human victims, and who encourages cruelty in his votaries, fii:. DetUe not yourselves In any of these things—In the preceding verses seventeen express cases of incest are enumerated; comprehending eleven of affinity, and six of consanguinity, together with some criminal enormities of an aggravated and unnatural character. In such prohibitions it was necessary for the instruction of a people low in the scale of moral perception, that the enumeration should be verj' specific as well as minute; and then, on completing it, the Divine lawgiver announces his own views of these crimes, without any exception or modification, in the remarkable terms employed in this verse. In all these the nations are del Ued which I cast out before you, &c.—Ancient history gives many appalling proofs that the enormous vices described in this chapter were very prevalent, nay, were regularly practised from religious motives in the temples of Egypt and the groves of Canaan; and it was these gigantic social disorders that occasioned the expulsion, of which the Israelites were, in the hands of a righteous and retributive Providence, the appointed instruments (Genesis 15. 16). The strongly figurative language of " the land itself vomiting out her inhabitants," shows the hopeless depth of their moral corruption. Therefore I do visit the Iniquity thereof upon it ; and the land Itself vomlteth out its Inhabitants—The Canaan-

Ver. 1-30. Unlawful SIakriages. a-*. I am tJie Lord yo«r God—This lenewetl mention of the Divine sovereisrnty over the Israelites was intended to bear particularly on some laws that were widely ditterent from the social customs that oljtained both in Egypt and Canaan; for the enormities whicli the laws enumerated in this chapter were intended to put down, were freely practised or publicly sanctioned in botli of tliose countries; and, indeed, the extermination of the ancient Canaanites is described as owing to the abominations with wliich they had polluted the land. 5. Ye sUall tUerefoie keep my statutes and my judgments; whicit If a man do, lie sliall live In tUem—A speciiil blessing was promised to the Isrixelites on condition of their obedience to the Divine law; and this promise was remarkably veritied at particular eras of their history, when pure and undefiled religion prevailed among tliem, in the public prosperity and domestic happiness enjoyed by them as a people. Obedience to the Divine law always, indeed, ensures temporal advantages; and this, doubtless, was the primary meaning of the words, "which if a man do, he shall live in thein." But that they had a higher reference to spiritual life is evifient from the application made of them by our Lord (Luke 10. 28) and tlie apostle (Romans 10.2). 6. A'one of yoii sitall approacli to any tUat Is near of kin —Very great laxity prevailed amongst the Egyptians in tlieir sentiments and practice about the conjugal relation, iis they not only openly .sanctioned marriages between brothers and sisters, but even between parents and children. Such incestuous alliances Moses wisely prohibited, and liis laws form the basis upon which the marriage rcfulations of this and other Christian nations are chiefly founded. This verse contains a general summary of all tlie particular prohibitions; an<l the forbidden intercourse is pointed out by the plirase, " to approach to." In the specified prohibitions that follow, and all of which are included in this general summary, the prohibited familiarity is indicated by the phrases, to "uncoverthe nakedness," to "take," and to "lie with." The phrase in this nth verse, tlierefore, has the same Identical meaning with each of the other three, and tlie marriages in reference to whicli it is used are those of consanguinity or too close ites, as enormous and incorrigible sinners, were to be exterminated; and this extermination was manifestly a judicial punishment inflicted by a ruler whose laws had been grossly and persevcringly outraged. Hut before a law can be disobeyed, it must have been previously in existence; and hence a law, prohibiting all the horrid crimes enumerated above—a law obligatory upon the Canaanites as well as oth nations—was already known and in force before the Ijcvitical law of incest was promulgated. Some general Law, then, prohibiting these crimes must have been publish'ed to mankind at a very early period of the world's history; and that law must either have been the moral law, originally written on the human heart, or a law on the institution of marriage revealed to Adam, and known to the Canaanites and others by tradition or otherwise. 20. the souls that commit them shall be cut oflP—This strong denunciatory language is applied to all the crimes speclflod in the chapter without distinction: to incest as truly as to bestiality, and to the eleven cases of allinityas fully as to the sl.x of consanguinity. Death is the punishment sternly fWnounced against all of them. No language could be more explicit or universal ; none could more strongly indicate Intense loathing .and abhorrence. 30. Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that ye commit not any one of these abominable customs—In giving the Israelites these particular Institutions, God was only re-delivering the law Imiirinted on the iiiitural heart of man ; for there affinity, aTnounfing to incestuous connections, is. Neltlier slialt tlion take a wife to lier sister, to vex l»er, Tlie original Is rendered in the margin, "neither shalt tlion take one wife to another to vex her," and two difl'erent and opposite interpretations have been put upon this passage. The marginal construction involves an express proliiliition of polygamy; and, indeed, there can l)e no douljt that the practice of liaving more wives tli.an one is lirectly contrary to the Divine will. It was prohiliifed by

(lie original law of marriage, and no evidence of its lawfulness under the Levitical code can be discovered, altliougli Moses—from "the hardness of their lie.arts "—tolerated it to the people of a rude and early age. Tlie second i.'itorpretation forms the ground upon which tlie "vexed question" has been raised in our times respecting tlie lawfulness of marriage with a deceased wife's sister. AVhatever arguments may lie us<^d to prove tlie unlawfulness or inexpediency of such a matrimonial relation, tlie passage under conslihu'ation cannot, on a sound liasis of criticism, be enlisted in the service; for tlie crimes with which it is liere associated warrant tlie conclusion that it points not to marriage with a deceased wife's -sister, but with a sister in the wife's lifetime—a pr.ietice common amongst the ancient Egyptians, (:;iiald('ans, and others. 21. tlion KtAiIt not let any of tliy s« ed pass tliroiili tlie fire to Bloleeli, etc.—Molech, or Moloch, which signifies "king," was the idol of the Ammonites. His statue was of brass, and rested on a pedestal or throne of the-samo metal. His head, resembling tliat of a calf, was adorned with a crown, and his aims were, extended in the altitude of embnu Mng tliose who approached him. His devotees dedicated their children to him; and when this was to be done, they heated the statue tea high pitch of laten.slty by a tire within, and ts every reason to believe that the Incestuous alllniiceg and unnatural crimes prohibited in this chapter were forbidden to all men by ,a law expressed or understood, from the beginning of the world, or at least from the era of the flood; since (!oil threatens toeoiidemn and punish. In a mannir .so sternly severe, thes<' atrocities in the practice of the Canaanites and their neighbours, who were not subject to the laws of the Hebrew nation.

A Repetition oj Sandi i/ Laws. LEMTICUS XIX, A Rcpeliiiun of Sundry Lma.

which God has established in the animal Icingdore. tlkou slialt not sow tliy field wltli mingled seed—Tills also was directed against an idolatrous practice, viz., thai of the ancient Zabiaus, or fire-worshippers, who sowed diflerent seeds, acconipanj'ing the actwitii magical rited and invocations; and commentators have generally tliought the design of this and the preceding law was to put an end to the unnatural lusts and foolisli superstitions which were prevalent amongst the, heathen. But the reason of the prohibition was probably deeper: for those who have studied the diseases of land and vegetables tell us, that tlie pnujtice of mingling seeds is injurious butli to flowers and to grains. "If the various genera of the natural order Gramineu;, wliicii. includes the grains and the grasses, should be sown in tlie same field, and flower at the same time, so that tlie pollen of tlie two flowers mix, a spurious seed will be the coii.seyuence, called by the fanners chess, and is always inferior, and unlike eitlierof the two grains tliat produced it, in size, flavour, and nutritious principles. Independently of contributing to disease tlie soil, they never fail to produce the same in animals and men that feed on them." [WhitIvAW.] neither stiall a garmeut of linen and woclleii come upon thee—although this precejit, like the other two with which it is associated, was in all probability designed to root out some superstition, it seems to have had a fartiier meaning. The law, it is to be observed, did not prohibit the Israelites wejiring many different kinds of cloths together, but onlj' the two specified; and the observations and i"eseaiches of modern science have proved that "wool, when combined with linen, increases its power of passing off the electricity from tlie body ; in hot climates, it brings on malignant fevers, and exhausts the strengtli, and when passing off from the body, it meets with the heated air, inflames and excoiaates like a blister." [Whitlaw.] (See Ezekiel 41. 17, 18.) 33-25. ye shall count the fruit tliereof as uncircumcised ; tliree years ... it shall not be eaten of—"The wisdom of this law is very striking. Every gardener will teach us not to

CHAPTER XIX.

Ver. A Repetition of Sundry Laws, 3. SpeaU uuto all the congregatloii of tlie cliildrtii of IsraelMany of the laws eiiumeiateJ in this chapfj-r had been previouslj' announced. As they were, however, of a general application, not suited to particular classes, but to the nation at large, so Moses seems, according to Divine instructions, to have rehearsed them, perhaps on differfcnt occasions sind to successive divisions of tlie people, tin "all the congregation of the cliildren of Israel" were tanght to Know them. The will of God in the Old as well as the New Testament Church was not locked up in tlie repositories of an unknown tongue, but comnumicated plainly lyid openly to the people. Ye sliall be Uoly: for I . . . am holy—Separated from the world, the people of God requii'ed to be holy, for His character. His laws, and service were lioly. (See 1 Peter 1. Ij.) 3. \ c shull fear every mail his mother and his father, and keep my sabbaths-Tlie duty of obedience to parents is placed in connection with the proper observance of the sabbatlis, as both of them lying at the foundation of practical religion. !i-f<. if ye offer a sacrifice of peace offerings uinto the Lord, ye shall offer it at your owu will Those whicli included thank offerings, or offerings made

(or vows, were always free-will oITerings. Except the portions which, being waved and heaved, became the property of the priests (see ch. 3.), the rest of the victim was eaten by tlie ol Terer and his friend, under the following regulations, however, that, if thank offerings, they were to be eaten on the day of their presentation ; and if a free-will otfering, although it might be eaten on the second day, yet if any remains of it were left till the third day, it was to be burnt, or deep criminality was incurred by the person who tlien ventured to jjartake of it. The reason of this strict proliibition seems to have been to prevent any mysterious virtue being superstitiously attached to meat olll'red on the altar. 9, 10. VVlneji ye reap the har\-est of your la»d, thou shalt not wholly reap the comers of tl»e field—The right of the poor in Israel to glean aflcr reapers, as well as to the unreaped corners of the field, was secured by a positive statute, and this, in addition to other enactments connected with the ceremonial law, formed a beneficial provision for their support. At tlie same time, proprietors were not obliged to admit them into the field until the grain had been carried off the field ; and they seem also to have been left at libertj' to choose the poor wliom they deemed the most deserving or needful (Ruth 2. 2, 8). This was the earliejst poor-law that we read of in the code of any people; and let fruit trees bear in their earliest years, but to pluck off the blossoms: and for this reason, that they will thus thrive tlie better, and bear more abundantly afterwards. The vry expression, 'to regard them as uncircumcised,' suggests the propriety of pinching them off; I do not say cutting them ott', because it is generally the hand, and not a knife, tliat is employed in this operation." [Michaelis.] 26. Ye shall not eat any tiling witit tile blood—(See on ch. 17. 10.) neither . . . use enchantment, nor observe times—Tlie former refers to divination bj' serpents—one of the earliest forms of enchantment, and the other means the observation, lit., of clouds, as a study of the appearance and motion of clouds was a common way of foretelling good or bad fortune. Such absurd but deeprooted superstitions often put a stop to the prosecution of serious and important transactions, but they were forbidden especially as implying a want of faith in the being, or of reliance on tlie providence of God. 27, Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, &c.—It seems probable, that this fashion had been learned by the Israelites in Egypt, for the ancient Egyptians had their dark locks cropped short or shaved with great nicety, so that what remained on the crown appeared in the form of a circle surrounding the head, whilst t)ie beard was dressed into a square form. This kind of coiflure had a highly idolatrous meaning; and it was adopted, with some slight variations, by almost all idolaters in ancient times. (Jeremiah 9. 25, 26; 25. 2:1, where "in tlie utmost corners" means having the corners of their hair cut.) Frequently a lock or tuft of hair was left on the hinder part of the head, the rest being cut round in the form of a ring, as tlie Turks, Chinese, and Hindoos do at the present day. neither shalt thou mar, Ac-The lOgyptians used to cut or shave off their whiskers, as may be seen in the coffins of mummies, and the representations of divinities on the monuments. But the Hebrews, in order to separate them from the neighbouring nations, or perhaps to put a stop to some existing superstition, were forbidden to Imitate this practice. It may appear surprising

It combined in admirable union the obligation of a public duty with the exercise of private and voluntary benevolence at a time when the hearts of the rich would be strongly Inclined to liberality. 11-lG. Ye shall not steal —A variety of social duties are inculcated in this passage, chiefly in reference to common and little-thought-of vices to which mankind are exceedingly prone; such as committing petty frauds, or not scrupling to violate truth in transactions of business; ridiculing bodily infirmities, or circulating stories to the prejudice of otliers. In opposition to these bad habits, a spirit of liumanity and l>rotherly kindness is strongly enforced. 17. thou shalt In any wise rebuke thy neighbour—Instead of cherishing latent feelings of malice, or meditating purposes of revenge against a person who has committed an insult or injury against tliem, God's people were taught to remonstrate with the offender, and endeavour, by calm and kindly reason, to bring him to a sense of his fault, not sufl Ter sin upon Mm—lit., that ye may not participate in his sin. 18. thou shalt love thy neighbour as ttoy«elf--The word "neighbour" is used as synonymous with feliow-creature. The Israelites In a later age regtrlctcd its meaning as applicable only to their own countrymen. This narrow Interpretation was refuted by our li Ord in a beautiful parable (Luke 10.30). 19. Tliou •halt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind— This prohibition was proljably Intended to discourage a practice which seemed to Infringe upon the economy

A Repetitiun of Siiiidrij Laws. LEVITICUS XX, XXI. Of the Prtejls' ilouming.

tnat Moses Khould condescend to such minutiie as that of regulating ti e fashion of the hair and the beard—matters which do not usually occupy the attention of a legislator —and which appear widely remote from the province either of government or of a religion. A strong presumpplaced on the edge of the precipice, was then pushed backwards, so that he fell down the perpendicular height on the stone lying below: if not killed by the fall, the second witness dashed a large stone down upon his breast, and then the "people of the land," who were bystanders, rushed forward, and with stones completed the work of death. (Matthew 21. 44 ; Acts 7. 5S.) *. If tlie people of the land do any ways hide tlteir ej'es from the man, &c. i. e., connive at their conntryjnen practising the horrid rites of Molech. Awful was it that any V'^ brew parents could so violate their national covenauv, and no wonder that God denounced the severest penalties against them and their families. 7-19. Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy—The minute specification of the incestuous and unnatural crimes heit enumerated shows their .sad prevalence amongst the idolatrous nations around, and the extreme proneness of the Israelites to follow the customs of their neighbours. It is to ))o understood, that, whenever mention is niade that the offender was "to be put to death" without describing the mode, stoning is meant. The only instance of another form of capital punishment occurs in v. 14, that of being burnt with tire; and yet it is probable that even here death was first inflicted by stoning, and the body of the criminal afterwards consumed by fire. (Joshua 7. 15.) 30. They sliall die cJxildless—Either by the judgment of God they shall have no children, or their spurious otispring shall be denied by human authority the ordinary privileges of children in Israel. 34-. I . . . have separated you from other people-Their selection fron\ the rest of the nations was for the all-importunt end of preserving the knowledge and worship of the true God amidst the viniversal apostasy; and as the distinction of meats was one great means of completing that separation, the law about making a difference between clean and unclean beasts is here repeated with emphatic solemnity.

tion, therefore, arises that he had it in view by these regulations to combat some superstitious practices of the Egyptians. 38. Ye sliall not make any cuttings In your flesh far the dead—The practice of making deep gashes on the face and arms and legs, in time of bereavement, was universal among the heathen, and it was deemed a becoming mark of respect for the dead, as well as a sort of propitiatory ofl Tering to the deities who presided over death and the grave. The Jews learned this custom in Egypt, and though weaned from it, relapsed in a later and degenerate age into this old superstition. (Isaiah 15. 2; Jeremiah 16. 6; 41. 5.) nor print any marks upon yon—by tatooing— imprinting figures of flowers, leaves, stars, and other fanciful devices on various parts of their person—the impression was made sometimes by means of a hot iron, sometimes by ink or paint, as is done by the Arab females of the present day and the different castes of the Hindoos. It is probable that a strong propensity to adopt such marks in honour of some idol gave occasion to the prohibition in this verse; and they were wisely forbidden, for they were signs of apostasy, and, when once made, were insuperable obstacles to a return. (See allusions to the practice, Isaiah 4-1. 5; Revelation 13. 17; 14. 1.) 30. keep my sabbaths, and reference my sanctuary—This precept is frequently repeated along with the prohibition of idolatrous practices, and nere it stands closely connected with the superstitions forljidden in the previo'is verses. 31. Regard not them that have familiar spirits—The Hebrew word, rendered "familiar spirit," signifies the belly, and sometimes a leathern bottle, from its similarity to the belly. It was applied in the sense of this passage to ventriloquists, who pretended to have communication with the invisible world ; and the Hebrews were strictly forbidden to conbult them; as the vain but high pretensions of those impostors were derogatory to tlie honour of God, and subversive of their covenant relations with him as his people, neither seek after wizards—fortune-tellers, wl* pretended, as the Hebrew word indicates, to prognosticate by palmistry, or an inspection of t!ie lines of the hand, the future fate of those who applied to them. 33, 34t. If a stranger sojourn witli tliee In your land, ye shall not vex him—The Israelites were to liold out encouragement to strangers to settle anjong Ihem, that they might be brought to the knowledge and worship of the true God; and with this view, they were enjoined to treat them not as aliens, but as friends, on the ground that they them-

CHAPTER XXI.

Ver. 1-24. Of the Pkiests' MouiiNiNG. 1. Tlierc shall none be det Ued for the dead among his people—The obvious design of the regulations contained in this chapter was to keep inviolate the pvirity and dignity of the sacred office. Contact with a corpse, or even contiguity to the place where it lay, entailing ceremonial defilement (Numbers 19. 14), all mourners were debarred from the tabernacle for a week; and as the exclusion of a priest during that period would have been attended with great inconvenience, the whole order were enjoined to abstain from all approaches to the dead, except at the funerals of relatives, to whom att'ection or necessity might call them to perform the last offices. Those exceptional cases, which are specified, were strictly confined to the members of their own family, within the n<>arest degrees of kindred. 4. l!ut he shall not delUe himself-" for any other," as the sense may be fully expressed. "The priest, in discharging his sacred functions, might well be regarded as a chief man among his people, and by these defilements might be said to profane himself." [liisiioi Patiiick.] The word rendered "chief man" signifies also "a husliand;" and the sense according to others is, "Hut he being a husband, shall not defile himself by the ob.sequles of a wile." (Ezeklel 44.25.) &. 'llkey shall not make lutlduess upon tlnelr headf! . . . nor . . . cuttings In their <le«ilt—Tha superstitious marks of sorrow, as well as the vioimtexselves, who were strangers in Egypt, were at first kindly and hospitably received in that country. 37. I am tl»e Lord—This solemn admonition, by which these various precepts are repeatedly sanctioned, is equivalent to "I, your Creator—your Deliverer from bondage, and your Sovereign, who have wisdom to establish laws, have power also to punish the violation of them." It was well fitted to impress the minds of tlie Isiaelites with a sense of their duty, and God's claims to obedience.

CHATTER XX.

Ver. 1-27. Giving One's Sked to Molech. 3. Whosoever . . . givcth any of l»i» seed unto Molecli (see on ch. IK. 21), tite people of the land slinll stone hiiu with Ktones, &c.—Criminals who were condemned to Ix; stoned were led, with their hands bound, without the gates to a small eminence, where was a large stone plac(;d at the bottom. When they had approached within ten cubits of tlie spot, they were exhorted to confess, tliat, l)y faith and repentan<-e, their souls miglit be saved. When led forward to within four cubits, they were stripped almost naked, and received some stupefying draught, during whlcli the witnesses prepared, by laying aside their oat(>r garments, to carry Into execution the capital sentence which the law bound them to do. The criminal, being cissi's In which the heathen indulged atthedealh of their friends, were forbidden by a general law to the Hebrew people (ch. 1!). 2.S). lUit the priests were to be laid under a special injunction, not only that they might exlilliU examples of piety in the moderation of their grief, but also liy tlie restraint of their passions, be tlie better (luallfied to administer the consolations of religion to others, and show, by their lalth in u blessed resi>rrection, Iht reasons for sorrowing not as those who have no hope. 7-J». Tlicy shall not take a wife that la a whore, or profane—Private Individuals might lornx several ct Minec'lons wliicl* were forbidden as inex| edlent or improDCin prii'sts. The respectability of their ol Ucs, and the ho;.<oi'i ol' ror/ie J^'iests m their Uncleanness. LEVITICIJS XXII. Who maij Eat of the Holy Thing* degrees of impurity which entailed a longer or shorter period of excommunication, and for the removal of wliich diflerent rites required to be observed according to the trivial or the malignant nature of the case. A person who came inadvertently into contact witli an uncleau animal was rendered unclean for a specified period; and then, at the expiry of that term, he washed, in token of his recovered purity. But a leper was unclean so long as he remained subject to tliat disease, and on his convalescence, he also washed, not to cleanse himself, for the water was inelfectual for that purpose, but to signily tlmt he was clean. Not a single case is recorded of a leper being restored to communion by tlie use of water; it served only as an outward and visible sign that such a restoration was to be made. Tlie boolc of Leviticus abounds with examples which show that in all the ceremoiiia< washings, as uncleanness riiennt loss of privileges, so baj Dtism with water indicated a restoration to those privileges. There was no exemption; for as the unclean ligion, required unblemished sanctity in tlieir families as well as tliemselves, and departures from it in tlielr case were visited with severer punisliment tlian in tliat of others. 10-15. lie that is tlie higU priest amoug liis brrtltren . . . sliall not uncover his head, nor rend liis clothes—The indulgence in the excepted cases of family bereavement, mentioned above, which was granted to the common priests, was denied to him ; for his absence from the sanctuary for theremoval of any contracted defilement could not have been dispensed with, neither could he have acted as intercessor for tlie people, unless ceremonially clean. Moreover, the high dignity of his office demanded a corresponding superiority in personal holiness, and stringent rules were prescribed for the purpose of upholding the suitable dignity of his station and family. The same rules are extended to the families of Christian ministers. (1 Timothy 3. 2; Titus 1.6.) 16-24-. Wliosoever he be . . . that hath any blemislv, let lilni not approach to offer the bread of his God—As visible things exert a strong influence on the minds of men. any phys-

Israelltte was exiled from the congregation, so tlie unclean priest was disqualified from executing his sacred functions in the sanctuary; and in the case of both, the same observance was required—a formal intimation of their being re-adinitted to forfeited privileges was intimated by the appointed rite of baptism. If any one neglected or refused to perform the washing, he disolicyeil .a positive precept, and he remained in his uncleanness; he forljore to avail himself of tliis privilege, and was therefore said to be "cut off" from the presence of the Lord. 8. dteth of itself—Tlie feelings of nature revolt against sneh food. It might liave been left to the discretion of the Hebrews, who it may lie supposed, lilvc tlie people of all civilized nations, would have abstained from tlie use of it without any positive interdict. But an express precept was necessary to sliow tliem that whatever died naturally or from disease, was proliibited to them liy tlie operation of that law which forbade them the use of any meat with ical infirmity or malformation of body in the ministers of religion, which disturbs the associations or excites ridicule, tends to detract from the weight and authority of thesacred ot Bce. Priests labouring under any personal defect were not allowed to officiate in tlie public service; they might le employed in some inferior duties about the sanctuary, but could not perform any sacred office. In all these regulations for preserving the unsullied purity of the sacred character and office, there was a typical reference to the priesthood of Christ. (Hebrews 7. 26.)

CHATTER XXII.

Ver. 1-9. The Priests in their Uncleanness. 3. Speak unto Aaron and to liis song, that ttieyseparate themselves from tine holy tilings—" To separate" means, in the language of tlie Mosaic ritual, " to abstain ;" and therefore the import of this injunction is, that the priests should abstain from eating tliat part of the sacits blood.

10-16. Who of the Pkiest.s' House may Eat of them. 10. There shall no stranger eat tie holy thing—The portion of the sacrifices assigned for the suiiport of the officiating priests was restricted to the exclusive use of his own family. A temporary guest or .a hired servant was not at liberty to eat of them ; but an exception was made in favor of a bought or home-born slave, because sucli was a stated member of his liousehold. On the same principle, his own daughter, who married a husband not a priest, could not eat of them ; thougli, if a widow and childless, she was reinstated in the privileges of her father's house as before her marriage. But If slie h.-ul become a mother, as her cliildren had no right to the privileges of tlie priesthood, she was under a necessity of finding support for them elsewhere than under her rifices which, though belonging to their order, was to be partaken of only by sucli of them as were free from legal impurities, that they profane not my holy name In those things which they hallow nnto me, &c.—i. e., let them not, by their want of due reverence, give occasion to profane my holy name. A careless or irreverent use of things consecrated to God tends to dislioiiour the name and bring disrespect on tlie worship of God. 3. Whosoever he be . . . that goeth unto the lioly things — Tlie multitude of minute restrictions to wliich the priests, from accident.al defilement, were sulijected, by keeping tliein constantly on their guard, lest they should be unfit for the sacred service, tended to preserve in full exorcise tlie feeling of awe and sulimission to the authority of God. Tlie ideas of sin and duty were awakened in their breasts by every case to which either an interdict or an injunction was applied. But wliy enact an express statute for priests dis(iualiflod by the leprosy or polluting touch of a carcass, wlien a general law was already in force whicli excluded from society all persons in tliat condition? Because priests might l)e apt, from familiarity to trifle with religion, and in committing irregularfatlier's roof. 1.3. There sh.all no stranger eat thereof —The interdict recorded {v. 10} is repeate<l to show its stringency. All the Hebrews, even the nearest neighbours of the priest, the members of his family excepted, were considered strangers in this respect, tliat they had no right to eat of things offered at tlio altar. 14. If a man eat of the holy things niiwittingly—A con.mon Israelite might unconsciously partake of wliat had lieen offered as tithes, first-fruits, &c., and. on discovering his unintentional error, he was not only to restore as ninch as lie had used, Init be fined In a fifth jiart more for tiie priests to carry into the sanctuary. 15, Ki. Tlney shall not profane the holy tilings of the cliildren of Israel —There is some difliculty felt in determining to whom " they" refers. The suliject of tlie preceding context being occupied about the priests. It is supposed by some that this relates to them also; and the mejinlng is, tliat the whole people would incur guilt through the fault ol the ities or sins, to shelter themselves under the cloak of the sacred office. This law, therefore, was passed, specifying the chief forms of temporary defilement wliich excluded from the sanctuary, that priests niiglit not deem them Belves entitled to greater license than tlie rest of tlie people; and that so far from being in any degree exempted from the sanctions of the law, tliey were under greater obligations, by their priestly station, to observe it in its strict letter and its smallest en.actments. 4-fi. wash his flesli with wat«r—Any Israelite w!io had contracted a defilement of such a nature as d(!l)arred him from the enjoyment of his wonted privih-gos, and had been legally cleansed from the disquulil'ying impurity, was liouiid to indicate his state of recovi'ry by tlie inimorsion of Ills whole person In wat=".r. AlthoiiKli all ceremouial impurity formed a ground of exclusion, tiiere were priests, if they should defile the sacred of Teriiigs, which they would have done had tliey presented them while under any (hfilement. [Caia'in.] According to others, "the children of Israel" Is the nominative in the sentence; which thus signifies, tlie children of Isracd shall not profane or defile their offerings, by tiiuchlng tli.em or reserving any part of them, lest tliey iticur.tlie guilt

The Snndiij Fiasis, LEVITICUS XXIII. The Pas.^o cr, Peiikcosl, etc-

Israelites ou the month of September than the people of Egypt had in honour of their idols. These institutions, however, were for the most part prospective, the observance being not binding ou the Israelites during their wanderings in the wilderness, while the regular celebration was not to commence till their settlement in Canaan.

of eating wliat is divinely appointed to tlie priests alone. [Calmet.]

17-33. The .Sackifices must be without Blemish. 19. fe shall offer at yoiixown will—ratlier, to your being aoceptP''. a male wit Uout Memisli—Tliis law (ch. 1. 3)

Is founaed on a sense of natural propriety, which required the greatest care to be taken in thfe selection of animals

5-8. The Passover, the Lord's passover—(See Exodus 12. 2, It, 18.) The institution of the Passover was intended to be a perpetual memorial of the circumstances attending the redemption of the Israelites, while it had a typical reference to a greater redemption to be elfected for God's spiritual people. On the first and last days of this feast, tlie people were forbidden to work; but wliile on the Sabbath they were not to do any work, on feast days tliey were permitted to dress meat—and hence the prohibition is restricted to "no servile work." At the same time, those two days were devoted to "holy convocation"—special seasons of social devotion. In addition to the ordinary sacrifices of every day, there were to bo "oll'erings by fire" on the altar (see on Numbers 28.19), while unleavened bread was to be eaten in families all the seven days (see 1 Corinthians 5. 8).

for sacrifice. The reason for this extreme caution is found i u the fact, that s.acrifices are either an expression of praise tx) God for his goodness, or else they are the designed means of conciliating or retaining His favour. No victim that was not perfect in its kind ccald be deemed a fitting instrument for such purposes, if we assume that the significance of sacrifices is derived entirely from their relation to Jehovah. Sacrifices may be likened to gifts made to a king by his subjects, and hence the reasonableness of God's strong remonstrance with the worldlyminded Jews (Malachi 1.8). If the tabernacle, and subsequently the temple, were considered the palace of the great King, then the sacrifices would answer to presents as offered to a monarch on various occasions by his subjects; and in this light they would be the appropriate expressions of tlieir feelings towards their sovereign. When a subject wished to do honour to his sovereign,

9-lt. The Sheaf OF FiRST-FRUirs. 10. ye shall bring a sheaf of tlie tirst-fruits of your harvest unto the priest—A sheaf, lit., an omer, of the tirsl-fiuits of the barley harvest. The barley being sooner ripe than tlie other grains, the reaping of it formed the commencement of the general harvest season. The offering described in this passage was made on the IGtli of the first month, and the day following the first Passover Sabbath, to acknowledge allegiance, to appease his anger, to supplicate forgiveness, or to intercede for another, he brouglit a present; and all the ideas involved in sacrifices correspond to these sentiments—those of gratitu<le, of worsliip, of praj'er, of confession and atonement. [Bib. .Sac] 23.

tliat mayest thou offer, Ac.—The passage should be rendered tlius: if tliou ot Tcr it either for a free-will ottering, or for a vow, it sliall not be accepted. This sacrifice being required,to be "witliout blemish," symbolically implied wliicli was on the 15th (corresponding to the beginning of our April); but it was reaped after sunset on tlie previous evening by pei'sons deputed to go with sickles, and obtain samples from different fields. These being laid together in a sheaf or loose bundle, were brougiit to the court of the temple, where the grain was winnowed, parched, and bruised in a mortar. Then, after some incense had been sprinkled on it, the priest waved it aloft before the Lord towards the four different points of the compass, took a part of it and threw it into the fire of tlie altar—all the rest being reserved to himself. It was a proper and lieautiful act, expressive of dependence on tliat the people of God were to dedicate themselves wliolly with sincere purposes of heart, and its being required to be "perfect to be accepted," led them typically to lUm without whom no sacrifice could be ofl'ered acceptable to God. 'Z7, 38. it slinll be seven days un«lcr the dniii Animals were not considered perfect nor good for food till tlie eighth day. As sacrifices are called the bread or fooil of God (v. 25), to offer them immediately after birtli, When they were unfit to be eaten, would have indicated a contempt of religion; and besides, tliis proliibition, as tlie God of nature and providence—common amongst all people, but more especially becoming the Israelites, who owed their land itself as well as all it produced to the Divine bounty. The offering of the wave-sheaf sanctiwell as that contained in the following verse, inculcated a lesson of humanity or tenderness to tlie dam, as well as Becured the sacrifices from all appearance of unfeeling cruelty.

fied the wliole harvest. (Romans 11. Hi.) At the same time, this feast had a typical character, and pre-intimated tlie resurrection of Christ (1 Corinthians 15. "20), who rose from the dead on the very day the first-fruits were olfereil.

CHAPTER XXIII.

Ver. 1-4. Of Sundky Feasts. 3. Spealc unto the cliU«lren of Israel concerning the feasts of tlie Iorrt

UL, "the times of assembling, or solemnities" (Isaiah 33.

15-22. Feast of Pentecost. 15. Ye shall count from the morrow after the Sabbath—;. <;., after the first day of Ihc passover week, which was observed as a Sabljatli. 10. Number Hfty days—The forty-nintli day after the presentation of the first-fruits, or the fiftieth, Including

20); and this is a preferable rendering, applicable to all Bacred seasons mentioned in tliis chapter, even the day of atonement, which was oliserved as a fast. They were appointed by the direct autliority of God, and announced by a pulilic proclamation, which Is called "tlie joyful sound" (Psalm 89.1")). Tliose "holy convocations" were evidences of Divine wisdom, and eminently siibservu'iit

It, M-as the feast of Pentecost. (See also Exodus 2.'!. Ifi; Deuteronomy !(>. 9.) 17. Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave-loav«'s of two tentit deals, itc. These loaves were made of "fine" or wheaten Hour, the quantity conlalned in them being somewhat more than ten lbs. weight. As the wave-sheaf gave the signal for the commencement, the two loaves solemnized the termito the maintenance ami dil Tusion of religions Icnowledge and piety. 3. Six days shall work be done; Imt the seventh day in the sabbath of rest—(See on I-'.xoiliis '31.

8,9.) The Sal)bath has tlio precedence given to it, and it was to be "a holy convocation," observed by families "in their dwellings;" wliere practicable, by the people repairing to tlie door of the tabernatde; at later periods, l)y meeting In the scliools of the propliets, and In synagogues. 4. these are the feasts of the T.ord, which ye Bhall proelniin in their seasons—Tlielr oliscrvance toolc n.-ition of the liarvest season. They were the first-fruits of that season, being ott'ered unto the Lord by the priest in naiiK of the whole nation. (.See on Exodus 31. 2'2.) The loaves used at the Passover were unleavened; those presented at Pentecost were leavened—a dltference whioli is thus accounted for, that the one was a memorial of the bread hastily prepared at their deiiarture, wliile the other was a tribute of gratitude to God for tli("lr dally food, place in tlie parts of the y(?ar corresponding to our Marcli, May, and September. Divine wisdom was manifested in fixing them at those periods; in winter, when Mie days were short and the roads broken up, a long journey was Impracticable; while In sninmiT the harvi'stand vintage gave busy employment In the fields, liesidcs, another reason for the choice of tho.se seasons probably was to counteract the Infiuence of Egyptian associations and whlcli was leavened. 'Zl. Ye sliall proclaim on the self-same day, that It maj' be an Iioly convociitlon unto you i ye shall do no servile work therein— Though It extended over a week, the first day only wan held as a Sabbath, both for the national offering of firstfruits and a memorial of the giving of the law. 'i't. Thou habits. And God appointed more sacred festivals for the

↑ Back to top