Aaron, saying, Aharon, dicendo: (continued)
JOHN CALVIN
Leviticus 10:8-11
8. And the LORD spake unto Aaron, saying,
8. Loquutus est etiam Jehova ad Aharon, dicendo:
9. Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: it shall be a statute for ever through-
9. Vinum et siceram non bibes tu et filii tui tecum, quando intrabitis in tabernaculum conventionis, ne moriamini: statutum perpetuum est in generationibus vestris: out your generations:
10. And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean;
10. Et ut discernatis inter sanctum et profanum, et inter immundum et mundum.
11. And that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the LORD hath spoken unto them by the hand of Moses.
11. Et ut doceatis filios Israel omnis statuta qum loquutus est Jehova ad eos per manum Mosis.
9. Do not drink wine, nor strong drink. The second cleanness required in the priests is that they should abstain from wine, and strong drink; 530 in which word Jerome says that everything intoxicating is included; and this I admit to be true; but the definition would be more correct, that all liquors espressed from fruits are denoted by it, in whose sweetness there is nearly as much to tempt men as in wine. Even in these days the Orientals compose of dates as well as of other fruits, liquors, which are exceedingly sweet and delicious. The same rule is, therefore, here prescribed for the priests, whilst in the performance of their duties, as for the Nazarites. Both were allowed freely to eat of all the richest foods; but God commanded them to be content
Lat., "sicera." Fr, "ce qui est nomme en Hebrieu Sechar." Blunt, "The veracity of the Books of Moses, etc.," art. 13, argues on the probability of Nadab and Abihu's sin in the offering of strange fire having been the effect of intoxication, from the fact of its relation being immediately followed by this prohibition. — Edit., 1835. Pp. 113, et seq.
Lorinus, however, in loco, refutes the notion from Tostatus, and so also Willet. It appears to have been of Jewish origin; and the principal arguments against it are, — 1. That it is not mentioned in the Scripture; and 2. That the offenders had been ministering from an early hour in the morning.