Text -- Leviticus 16:20-22 (NET)

The Live Goat Ritual Procedures

16:20 “When he has finished purifying the holy place, the Meeting Tent, and the altar, he is to present the live goat. 16:21 Aaron is to lay his two hands on the head of the live goat and confess over it all the iniquities of the Israelites and all their transgressions in regard to all their sins, and thus he is to put them on the head of the goat and send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a man standing ready. 16:22 The goat is to bear on itself all their iniquities into an inaccessible land, so he is to send the goat away in the wilderness.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Wesley: Lev 16:21

He mentions iniquities, transgressions, and sins, to note sins of all sorts, and that a free and full confession was to be made, and that the smallest sins needed, and the greatest sins were not excluded from, the benefit of Christ's death here represented.

Wesley: Lev 16:21

Charging all their sins and the punishment due to them upon the goat, which tho' only a ceremony, yet being done according to God's appointment and manifestly pointing at Christ upon whom their iniquities and punishments were laid, Isa 53:5-6, it was available for this end. And hence the Heathens took their custom of selecting one beast or man, upon whom they laid all their imprecations and curses, and whom they killed as an expiatory sacrifice for their sins, and to prevent their ruin.

Wesley: Lev 16:21

Heb. a man of time, that is, of years and discretion, who may be trusted with this work.

Wesley: Lev 16:21

Which signified the removal of their sins far away both from the people, and out of God's sight. And here the goat being neglected by all men, and exposed to many hazards from wild beasts, which were numerous there, might farther signify Christ's being forsaken both by God and by men, even by his own disciples, and the many dangers and sufferings he underwent. The Jews write, that this goat was carried to the mountain called Azazel, whence the goat is so called, Lev 16:10, and that there he was cast down headlong.

JFB: Lev 16:20-22

Having already been presented before the Lord (Lev 16:10), 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 goat as their substitute. It was then delivered into the hands of a person, who was appointed to lead him away into a distant, solitary, and desert place, where in early times he was let go, to escape for his life; but in the time of Christ, he was carried to a high rock twelve miles from Jerusalem, and there, being thrust over the precipice, he was killed. Commentators have differed widely in their opinions about the character and purpose of this part of the ceremonial; some considering the word "Azazel," with the Septuagint and our translators, to mean, "the scapegoat"; others, "a lofty, precipitous rock" [BOCHART]; others, "a thing separated to God" [EWALD, THOLUCK]; while others think it designates Satan [GESENIUS, HENGSTENBERG]. This last view is grounded on the idea of both goats forming one and the same sacrifice of atonement, and it is supported by Zec 3:1-10, which presents a striking commentary 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 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 [Heb 10:4; 1Jo 3:5].

Clarke: Lev 16:21

Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head, etc. - What this imposition of hands meant see in the notes on Exo 29:10 (note), and Lev 1:4 (note)

Clarke: Lev 16:21

And confess over him all the iniquities - transgressions - sins - The three terms used here, Iniquities, עונת avonoth , from עוה avah , to pervert, distort, or turn aside; Transgressions, פשעים peshaim , from פשע pasha , to transgress, to rebel; and Sins, חטאת chattaoth , from חטא chata , to miss the mark, are supposed by the Jews to comprise every thing that implies a breach of the Divine law, or an offense against God. See Clarke’ s note on Gen 12:13. Maimonides gives us the confession in the following words: -

"O Lord, thy people, the house of Israel, have sinned and done iniquity, and trespassed before thee. O Lord, make atonement now for the iniquities and transgressions and sins that thy people, the house of Israel, have sinned and transgressed against thee; as it is written in the law of Moses thy servant, saying: That in this day he shall make atonement for you, to cleanse you from all your sins before the Lord, and ye shall be clean."- See the Mishna, vol. ii., p. 329. When this confession was finished, the goat was sent by a proper hand to the wilderness, and there let loose; and nothing farther was ever heard of it. Did not all this signify that Christ has so carried and borne away our sins, that against them who receive him as the only true atoning sacrifice they should never more be brought to remembrance? On the head of the scape-goat, a piece of scarlet cloth was tied, and the tradition of the Jews states that if God accepted the sacrifice, the scarlet cloth turned white while the goat was led to the desert; but if God had not accepted this expiation, the redness continued, and the rest of the year was spent in mourning. From the foundation of the Church of God it was ever believed by his followers, that there were certain infallible tokens by which he discovered to genuine believers his acceptance of them and their services. This was sometimes done by a fire from heaven consuming the sacrifice; sometimes by an oracular communication to the priest or prophet; and at other times, according to the Jewish account, by changing the fillet or cloth on the head of the scape-goat from scarlet to white: but most commonly, and especially under the Gospel dispensation, he gives this assurance to true believers by the testimony of his Spirit in their consciences, that he has forgiven their iniquities, transgressions, and sins, for his sake who has carried their griefs, and borne their sorrows.

Calvin: Lev 16:20

20.And when he hath made an end of reconciling The mode of expiation with the other goat is now more clearly explained, viz., that it should be placed before God, and that the priest should lay his hands on its head, and confess the sins of the people, so that he may throw the curse on the goat itself. This, as I have said, was the only bloodless (ἀναίματον) sacrifice; yet it is expressly called an “offering,” ²⁴⁸ with reference, however, to the slaying of the former goat, and was, therefore, as to its efficacy for propitiation, by no means to be separated from it. It was by no means reasonable that an innocent animal should be substituted in the place of men, to be exposed to the curse of God, except that believers might learn that they were in no wise competent to bear His judgment, nor could be delivered from it otherwise than by the transfer of their guilt and crime. For, since men feel that they are altogether overwhelmed by the wrath of God, which impends over them all, they vainly endeavor to lighten or shake off in various ways this intolerable burden; for no absolution is to be hoped for save by the interposition of a satisfaction; and it is not lawful to obtrude this according to man’s fancy, or, in their foolish arrogance, to seek in themselves for the price whereby their sins may be compensated for. Another means, therefore, of making atonement to God was revealed when Christ, “being made a curse for us,” transferred to Himself the sins which alienated men from God. (2Co 5:19; Gal 3:13.) The confession tended to humiliate the people, and thus acted as a stimulus to sincere repentance; since “the sacrifices of God are a broken spirit,” (Psa 51:17;) nor is it fit that any but the prostrate should be lifted up by God’s mercy, nor that any but those who voluntarily condemn themselves should be absolved. The accumulation of words tends to this, “all the iniquities, all their transgressions, all their sins,” that believers may not lightly only and as, a mere act of duty acknowledge themselves guilty before God, but rather that they should groan under the weight, of their guilt. Since now in Christ no special day in the year is prescribed in which the Church should confess its sins in a solemn ceremony, let believers learn, whenever they meet together in God’s name, humbly to submit themselves to voluntary self-condemnation, and to pray for pardon, as if the Spirit of God dictated a formulary for them; and so let each in private: conform himself to this rule.

TSK: Lev 16:20

reconciling : Lev 16:16, Lev 6:30, Lev 8:15; Eze 45:20; 2Co 5:19; Col 1:20

live goat : Rom 4:25, Rom 8:34; Heb 7:25; Rev 1:18

TSK: Lev 16:21

lay : Lev 1:4; Exo 29:10

confess over : Lev 26:40; Ezr 10:1; Neh 1:6, Neh 1:7, Neh 9:3-5; Psa 32:5, Psa 51:3; Pro 28:13; Dan. 9:3-20; Rom 10:10

putting : Isa 53:6; 2Co 5:21

a fit man : Heb. a man of opportunity, The man that took the scape-goat into the wilderness, and they that burned the sin offering, were to be looked upon as ceremonially unclean, and must not come into the camp till they had washed their clothes and bathed their flesh in water, which signified the defiling nature of sin; even the sacrifice which was made sin, was defilingcaps1 . acaps0 lso the imperfection of the legal sacrifices, they were so far from taking away sin, that they left some stain even upon those that touched them.

TSK: Lev 16:22

bear upon : Isa 53:11, Isa 53:12; Joh 1:29; Gal 3:13; Heb 9:28; 1Pe 2:24

not inhabited : Heb. of separation, Psa 103:10, Psa 103:12; Eze 18:22; Mic 7:19

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Lev 16:11-25

It is important, in reference to the meaning of the day of atonement, to observe the order of the rites as they are described in these verses.

Lev 16:12

A censer - See Exo 25:38 note.

The altar before the Lord - i. e. the altar of burnt-offering on which the fire was always burning.

Lev 16:14

The high priest must have come out from the most holy place to fetch the blood, leaving the censer smoking within, and then have entered again within the veil. He sprinkled the blood seven times upon the mercy-seat, on its east side (not "eastward"), and then seven times upon the floor in front of it. If the mercy-seat may be regarded as an altar, the holiest one of the three, on this one occasion in the year atonement was thus made for it, as for the other altars, with sacrificial blood.

Lev 16:15

Having completed the atonement in the holy of holies on behalf of the priests, the high priest had now to do the same thing on behalf of the people.

Lev 16:16

The "holy place"- Here the place within the veil, the holy of holies.

Tabernacle of the congregation - tent of meeting. atonement was now to be made for the tabernacle as a whole. The sense is very briefly expressed, but there seems to be no room to doubt that the high priest was to sprinkle the blood of each of the victims before the altar of incense, as he had done before the mercy-seat within the veil; and also to touch with blood the horns of the altar of incense Exo 30:10.

That remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness - Compare Lev 16:19. The most sacred earthly things which came into contact with the nature of man needed from time to time to be cleansed and sanctified by the blood of the sin-offerings which had been taken into the presence of Yahweh. See Exo 28:38 note.

Lev 16:18

The order of the ceremony required that atonement should first be made for the most holy place with the mercy-seat, then for the holy place with the golden altar, and then for the altar in the court. See Lev 16:20, Lev 16:33. The horns of the brazen altar were touched with the blood, as they were in the ordinary sin-offerings. Lev 4:25, Lev 4:30, Lev 4:34.

Of the blood of the bullock, and of the blood of the goat - Some of the blood of the two victims was mingled together in a basin.

Lev 16:21

Confess over him - The form of confession used on this occasion in later times was: "O Lord, Thy people, the house of Israel, have transgressed, they have rebelled, they have sinned before Thee. I beseech Thee now absolve their transgressions, their rebellion, and their sin that they have sinned against Thee, as it is written in the law of Moses Thy servant, that on this day he shall make atonement for you to cleanse you from all your sins, and ye shall be clean."

A fit man - literally, a timely man, or a man at hand. Tradition says that the man was appointed for this work the year before.

Lev 16:22

Unto a land not inhabited - Unto a place cut off, or (as in the margin) a place "of separation."

It is evident that the one signification of the ceremony of this goat was the complete removal of the sins which were confessed over him. No symbol could so plainly set forth the completeness of Yahweh’ s acceptance of the penitent, as a sin-offering in which a life was given up for the altar, and yet a living being survived to carry away all sin and uncleanness.

Poole: Lev 16:21

Both his hands See on Exo 29:10 Lev 1:4 . And confess over him; confession of sin being a duty to accompany the sacrifice offered for it, as we see Lev 5:5 Num 5:7 . All their transgressions in all their sins, or, with or according to all their sins; for so the Hebrew particle is oft used. He mentions iniquities, transgressions , and sins, to note sins of all sorts, and that a very free and full confession was to be made, and that the smallest sins needed, and the greatest sins were not excluded from, the benefit of Christ’ s death here represented.

Putting them upon the head of the goat charging all their sins and the punishment due to them upon the goat, which though only a ceremony, yet being done according to God’ s appointment, and manifestly pointing at Christ, upon whom their iniquities and punishments were laid, Isa 53:5,6 , it was available for this end. And hence the heathens took their custom of selecting one beast or man upon whom they laid all their imprecations and curses, and whom they killed as an expiatory sacrifice for their sins, and to prevent their ruin. A fit man ; one that knows the wilderness, and the way to it, and what places in it are most convenient for that use. Heb. a man of time , i.e. of years and discretion, who may be trusted with this work. Into the wilderness; which signified the removal of their sins far away, both from the people, and out of God’ s sight, or from the place of his presence. And here the goat being neglected by all men, and exposed to many hardships and hazards from wild beasts, which were numerous there, might further signify Christ’ s being forsaken, both by God and by men, even by his own disciples, and the many dangers and sufferings he underwent. The Jews write, that this goat was carried to the mountain called Azazel, whence the goat is so called, Lev 16:10 ; and that there he was cast down headlong; and that the red string by which he was led turned white when God was pleased with the Israelites, otherwise it remained red; and then they mourned all that year. And the ancient Hebrews write, that forty years before the destruction of the temple, which was about the time of Christ’ s death, this red string turned no more white.

Haydock: Lev 16:22

Desert, to be devoured by wild beasts, (Menochius) or hurled down a precipice.

Gill: Lev 16:20

And when he hath made an end of reconciling the holy place,.... That is, the holy of holies, by carrying in the blood of the bullock, and of the goat there, and sprinkling them as before observed:

and the tabernacle of the congregation; the great court where the people met, and where the altar of burnt offering stood:

and the altar; the altar of incense in the holy place; and so all the parts of the tabernacle were reconciled and atoned for, even the holy of holies, the holy place, and the court of the people: all the work the day of atonement, we are told ^w, was done according to the order prescribed, and that if anything was done before another, it was doing nothing: thus, for instance, if the blood of the goat went before (or was sprinkled before) the blood of the bullock, he must return and sprinkle of the blood of the goat after the blood of the bullock; and if before he has finished the puttings (of the blood) within, the blood is poured out, (that is, at the bottom of the altar of burnt offering,) he shall bring other blood, and return and sprinkle anew within, and so in the temple, and at the golden altar, for every atonement is by itself:

he shall bring the live goat; that which remained alive after the other was slain, as it was to do, according to the lot that fell upon it, Lev 16:10; this was brought to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, whither the high priest went, and performed the following rites.

Gill: Lev 16:21

And Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat,.... In this order as the Targum of Jonathan says, his right hand upon his left hand on the head of the live goat; this was done in the name of the people, hereby transferring their sins, and the punishment of them, to it:

and confess him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins; which takes in their sins, greater or lesser, sins of ignorance and presumption, known or not known ^x, even all sorts of and all of them: the form of confession used in after times was this ^y; O Lord, thy people, the house of Israel, have done perversely, have transgressed sinned berate thee, O Lord, expiate now the iniquities, transgressions, and sins, in which thy people, the house of Israel, have done perversely, transgressed, and sinned before thee, as it is written in the law of Moses thy servant (#Le 16:30;) and it is added, and the priests and people that stood in the court, when they heard the name Jehovah go out of the mouth of the high priest, they bowed, and worshipped, and fell upon their faces, and said, blessed be God, let the glory of his kingdom be for ever and ever:

putting them upon the head of the goat; that is, the iniquities, transgressions, and sins of the people of Israel before confessed, and that by confession of them, with imposition of hands; and which was typical of the imputation of the sins of the people of God to Christ, of the Lord laying, or causing to meet on him the iniquities of them all, and of his being made sin by imputation for them:

and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness; whether the wilderness of Judea, or what other is intended, is not certain. The Targum of Jonathan calls it the wilderness of Zuck; which, according to the Misnah ^z, was three miles from Jerusalem, at the entrance of the wilderness; and whereas in another Misnah ^a, instead of Bethchadudo, Bethhoron is mentioned, which is said also to be three miles from Jerusalem: it is not an improbable conjecture of Dr. Lightfoot ^b, that the goat was sent in the way to Bethhoron, which was the same distance from Jerusalem as the other place was, in the northern coast of Judea, and had very rough hills about it, and a narrow passage to it. The man, by whom he was sent, was one fit for the purpose, that knew the way to the wilderness, and was acquainted with it; a man of years and understanding, and of a disposition suitable for such a service; the Septuagint version renders it one that was "ready"; and the Targums, one that was "prepared" to go, or "appointed", and got ready; Jarchi says, the day before; but the Targum of Jonathan a year ago: perhaps it designs one, that being once appointed, was continued, and so was used to it from time to time, and constantly did it: the phrase properly signifies "a man of time" or "opportunity" ^c; Aben Ezra finds fault with those who render it a wise man, but observes, that some of their Rabbins say it was a priest that led the goat to the wilderness, which he approves of; according to the Misnah ^d, all were fit for this service (formerly common and unclean), but what the high priest did (afterwards) was fixed, and they did not suffer an Israelite to lead him (i.e. a common Israelite, one that was not a priest); according to the Talmud ^e, even a stranger, and an unclean person, was fit for this service. In the mystical sense, by this fit man, or man of opportunity, is not meant, according to Abarbinel, Nebuchadnezzar, who led the children of Israel into the wilderness of the people, into the Babylonish captivity; but rather, if it could be understood of Christ being sent, and carried into the wilderness of the Gentile world, upon his resurrection and ascension to heaven, the Apostle Paul might be thought of; who was a chosen vessel to carry his name there, and was eminently the apostle of the Gentiles: but seeing by Azazel, to whom this goat was let go, Satan seems to be meant; if, as some think ^f, Christ was baptized on the day of atonement, and on that day was led by the Spirit to the wilderness of Judea, there to be tempted of the devil, that might be considered as a very singular accomplishment of the type; and the Jews seem to expect the Messiah on the day of atonement ^g: or rather, as Witsius ^h observes, the hand of the fit man may denote the power that rose up against Christ, namely, the Gentiles and the people of Israel, and particularly Pilate, who took care that Christ, burdened with the cross, an emblem of the curse, should be led without the gate, where he had his last conflict with the devil; See Gill on Lev 16:10. This is applied to Pilate by Origen ⁱ.

Gill: Lev 16:22

And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited,.... Where it would never be seen, and from whence it would never return more; and so was a proper type of Christ, who has borne all the sins of all his people in his own body on the cross, and all the punishment due unto them; and so has made full satisfaction for them, and has removed them from them, as far as the east is from the west, and out of the sight of avenging justice; so that when they are sought they shall not be found, nor shall they ever return unto them, or be brought against them any more; see Isa 53:12,

and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness; that is, the man that was appointed to have him thither; and so the Targum of Jonathan,"and the man shall let go the goat into the wilderness of Zuck; and the goat shall go upon the mountains of Beth Chadure (or Chadudo), and a tempestuous wind from the Lord shall drive him down, and he shall die.''The manner of conducting this whole affair was this; they made for him a causeway (i.e. for the man that had the goat committed to his care, to have it out of the court, and out of the city), because of the Babylonians, who would pluck him by the hair, and say, Get out, begone, get out, begone. The nobles of Jerusalem accompanied him to the first booth, for there were ten booths from Jerusalem to Zuck, which were ninety furlongs, seven and a half to every mile; at every (i.e. twelve miles) at every booth they said to him, Lo food, lo water, and they accompanied him from booth to booth, excepting the last of them; for there was not one went with him to Zuck, but stood afar off, and observed what he did: what did he do? he parted a scarlet line, half of it he bound to the rock, and half of it he bound between his horns (the goat's), and pushed him backwards, and he rolled and went down, but before he came half way down the mountain he was dashed to pieces; then he (the man) went and sat under the last booth until it was dark--they said to the high priest, the goat is got to the wilderness; but from whence did they know that the goat was got to the wilderness? they made watchtowers or beacons, and they waved linen cloths, and so knew when the goat was come to the Wilderness ^k. But the Scripture is entirely silent about the death of this goat, though it no doubt died in the wilderness, only says that it was let go, and was at liberty to go where it would; intimating that the people of Israel were free from all their sins, and they should be no more seen nor remembered; typical of the deliverance and freedom of the people of God from all their sins by Christ. This affair was imitated by Satan among the Heathens, particularly the Egyptians, as has been observed by many out of Herodotus ^l; who relates, that they used to imprecate many things upon the head of a beast slain for sacrifice, and then carried it to market, where were Grecian merchants, to whom they sold it; but if there were none, they cast it into the river, execrating the head after this manner, that if any evil was to befall either themselves that sacrificed, or all Egypt, it might be turned upon that head. And on account of this custom, which obtained among all the Egyptians, no one among them would ever taste the head of any animal; which Plutarch ^m also affirms, who says, that having made an execration upon the head of the sacrifice, and cut it off, formerly they cast it into the river, but now they give it to strangers. And a like custom obtained among other nations, as the Massilians and Grecians ⁿ.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Lev 16:20

¹ tn Heb “And he shall finish from atoning the holy place.” In this case, the “holy place” etc. are direct objects of the verb “to atone” (cf. v. 33a below). In this case, therefore, the basic meaning of the verb (i.e., “to purge” or “wipe clean”) comes to the forefront. When the prepositions עַל (’al) or בֲּעַד (ba’ad) occur with the verb כִּפֶּר (kipper) the purging is almost always being done “for” or “on behalf of” priests or people (see the note on Lev 1:4 as well as R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 2:698, the literature cited there, and B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 110, for more details).

NET Notes: Lev 16:21

¹ tn Heb “transgressions to all their sins.”

² tn Heb “and he shall give them.”

³ tn The meaning of the Hebrew term עִתִּי (’itti) is uncertain. It is apparently related to עֵת (’et, “time”), and could perhaps mean either that he has been properly “appointed” (i.e., designated) for the task (e.g., NIV and NRSV) or “ready” (e.g., NASB and NEB).

NET Notes: Lev 16:22

¹ tn The Hebrew term rendered “inaccessible” derives from a root meaning “to cut off” (cf. NAB “an isolated region”). Another possible translation would be “infertile land” (see HALOT 187 s.v. *גָּזֵּר and cf. NRSV “a barren region”; NLT “a desolate land.”

² tn Heb “and he [the man (standing) ready, v. 21] shall send the goat away.”

Geneva Bible: Lev 16:21

And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them ^{( g )} upon the head of the goat, and shall send [him] away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness:

^{( g )} In this goat is a true figure of Jesus Christ, who bears the sins of the people, (Isa 53:9).

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Lev 16:1-34

1 How the high priest must enter into the holy place.

11 The sin offering for himself.

15 The sin offering for the people.

20 The scape-goat.

29 The yearly feast of the expiations.

Maclaren: Lev 16:22

Lev. 16:22

And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited …'--Lev. 16:22.

The import Of the remarkable treatment of this goat does not depend on the interpretation of the obscure phrase rendered in the Authorized Version for the scapegoat.' Leaving that out of sight for the moment, we observe that the two animals were one sacrifice, and that the transaction with the living one was the completion of that with the slain. The sins of the congregation, which had been already ex-plated by the sacrifice, were laid by the high priest on the head of the goat, which was then sent away into the wilderness that he might bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited' (v. 22). Nothing depends on the fate of the goat, though, in after times, it was forced over a precipice and so killed. The carrying away of expiated sin, and not the destruction of unexpiated sinners, is the meaning of the impressive rite, and, had it been possible, the same goat that was sacrificed would have been sent into the desert. As that could not be done, an ideal unity was established between the two: the one sacrificed represented the fact of expiation, the one driven away represented the consequences of expiation in the complete removal of sin. The expiation was made within the veil ; but a visible token of its completeness was given to help feeble faith, in the blessed mystery of tile unseen propitiation. What was divided in the symbol between the twin goats is all done by the one Sacrifice, who has entered into the holiest of all, at once Priest and Sacrifice, and with His own blood made expiation for sin, and has likewise carried away the sin of the world into a land of forgetfulness, whence it never can return.

The clear meaning of the rite, is thus obtained, whatever be the force of the difficult phrase already referred to. Scapegoat' is certainly wrong. But it may be questioned whether the Revised Version is right in retaining the Hebrew word untranslated, and, by putting a capital letter to it, marking it as a proper name (for Azazel'). The word occurs only here, so that we have no help from other passages. It seems to come from a root meaning to drive away,' and those who take it to be a proper name, generally suppose it to refer to some malignant spirit, or to Satan, and interpret it as meaning a fiend whom one drives away,' or, sometimes, who drives away.' The vindication of such an interpretation is supposed to lie in the necessity of finding a complete antithesis in the phrase to the for Jehovah' of the previous clause in verse 8. But it is surely sacrificing a good deal to rhetorical propriety to drag in an idea so foreign to the Pentateuch, and so opposed to the plain fact, that both goats were one sin offering (v. 5), in order to get a pedantically correct antithesis. In the absence of any guidance from usage, certainty as to the meaning of the word is unattainable. But there seems no reason, other than that of the said antithesis, against taking it to mean removal or dismissal, rather than a remover.' The Septuagint translates it in both ways: as a person in verse 8, and as sending away' in verse 10. If the latter meaning be adopted, then the word just defines the same purpose as is given more at length in verse 22, namely, the carrying away of the sins of the congregation. The logical imperfection of the opposition in verse 8 would then be simply enough solved by the fact that while both goats were for the Lord,' one was destined to be actually offered in sacrifice, and the other to be for dismissal.' The incomplete contrast testifies to the substantial unity of the two, and needs no introduction, into the most sacred rite of the old covenant, of a ceremony which looks like demon-worship than a parable of the great expiation for a world's sins.

The question for us is, What spiritual ideas are con-rained in this Levitical symbolism? There is signified, surely, the condition of approach to God. Remember how the Israelites had impressed on their minds the awful sanctity of within the veil.' The inmost shrine was trodden once a year only by the high priest, and only after anxious lustrations and when clothed in pure garments, he entered with sacrifice and incense lest he die.' This ritual was for a gross and untutored age, but the men of that age were essentially like ourselves, and we have the same sins and spiritual necessities as they had.

The two goats are regarded as one sacrifice. They are a sin offering.' Hence, to show how unimportant and non-essential is the distinction between them, the lot' is employed; also, while the one is being slain, the other stands before the door of the Tabernacle.' This shows that both are parts of one whole, and it is only from the impossibility of presenting both halves of the truth to be symbolized in one that two are taken. The one which is slain represents the sacrifice for sin. The other represents the effects of that sacrifice. It is never heard of more. The Lamb of God taketh away the sins of the world.' As far as the east is from the west, so far hath He removed our transgressions from us.'

I. The Perfect Removal Of All Sin Is Thus Symbolized.

Notice,

(1) the vivid consciousness of sin which marked Judaism. Was it exaggerated or right?

The same consciousness is part of all of us, but how overlaid, how stifled!

That consciousness once awakened has in it these elements--a bitter sense of sin as mine, involving guilt; despair as to whether I can ever overcome it; and fearful thoughts of my relation to God which conscience itself brings.

(2) The futility of all attempts to remove these fears. False religions have next to nothing to say about forgiveness. Sacrifices and lustrations they have, but no assurance of absolution. Systems of philosophy and morals have nothing to say but that the universe goes crashing on, and if you have broken its laws you must suffer. That is all, or only the poor cheer of Well I you have fallen, get up and go on again!' So men often drug themselves into forgetfulness. They turn away from the unwelcome subject, and forget it at the price of all moral earnestness and often of all happiness; a lethargic sleep or a gaiety, as little real as that of the Girondins singing in their prison the night before being led out to the guillotine.

It is only God's authoritative revelation that can ensure the cure, only He can assure us of pardon, and of the removal of all barriers between ourselves and His love. Only His word can ensure, and His power can effect, the removal of the consequences of our sins. Only His word can ensure, and His power effect, the removal of the power of evil on our characters.

(3) Still the question, Can guilt ever be cancelled? often assumes a fearful significance.

Doubtless much seems to say that it cannot be.

(a) The irrevocableness of the past.

(b) The rigid law of consequences in this world.

(c) The indissoluble unity of an individual life and moral nature, confirmed by the experience of failure in all attempts at reformation of self.

(d) The consciousness of disturbed relations with God, and the prophecy of judgment. All this that ancient symbol suggested. The picture of the goat going away, and away, and away, a lessening speck on the horizon, and never heard of more is the divine symbol of the great fact that there is full, free, everlasting forgiveness, and on God's part, utter forgetfulness. Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow.' I will remember them no more at all for ever.'

II. The Bearing Away Of Sin Is Indissolubly Connected With Sacrifice.

Two goats were provided, of which one was offered for a sin offering, indicating that sacrifice came first; then the removal of sin was symbolized by the sending away of the second goat. There is an evident reference to this sequence in the words without shedding of blood there is no remission.' The two goats represent Christ's work; the one in its essence, the other in its effect.

The one teaches that sacrifice is a necessary condition of pardon. Forgiveness was not given because the offerer confessed his guilt or because God was merciful,' but because the goat had been slain as a sin offering. There is deep spiritual truth for us in this symbolism. We do not need to enter on the philosophy of atonement, but simply to rest on the fact--that the only authority on which we can be sure of forgiveness at all indissolubly associates the two things, sacrifice and pardon. We have no reason to believe in forgiveness except from the Bible record and assurance.

Was the Mosaic ritual a divinely appointed thing? If so, its testimony is conclusive. But even if it were only the embodiment of human aspirations and wants, it would be a strong evidence of the necessity of some such thing as forgiveness.

The shallow dream that God's forgiveness can be extended without a sacrifice having been offered does not exalt but detracts from the divine character. It invariably leads to an emasculated abhorrence of evil, and detracts from the holiness of God, as well as introduces low thoughts of the greatness of forgiveness and of the infinite love of God.

III. The Bearing Away Of Sin Is Associated With Man's Laying Of His Sins On The Sacrifice Appointed By God.

We have seen that the two goats must be regarded as together making one whole. The one which was slain made atonement … because of the uncleannesses of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions, even all their sins,' but that expiation was not actually effective till Aaron had laid his hands on the head of the live goat, and confessed over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel … and put them on the head of the live goat, and sent him away into the wilderness.' The sacrifice of the slain goat did not accomplish the pardon or removal of the people's sins, but made it possible that their sins should be pardoned and removed.

Then the method by which that possibility is realized is the laying hands on the scapegoat and confessing the sins upon it. The sins which are actually forgiven, by virtue of the atonement made for all sins, are those which it bears away to the wilderness.

This answers, point for point, to repentance and faith. By these the possibility is turned into an actuality for as many as believe on Christ.

Christ has died for sin. Christ has made atonement by which all sin may be forgiven; whether any shall actually be forgiven depends on something else. It is conceivable that though Christ died, no sin might be pardoned, if no man believed. His blood would not, even then, have been shed in vain, for the purpose of it would have been fully effected in providing a way by which any and all sin could be forgiven. So that the whole question whether any man's sin is pardoned turns on this, Has he laid his hand on Christy Faith is only a condition of forgiveness, not a cause, or in itself a power. There was no healing in the mere laying of the hand on the head of the goat.

It was not faith which was the reason for forgiveness, but God's love which had provided the sacrifice.

God's will is not a bare will to pardon, nor a bare will to pardon for Christ's sake, but for Christ's sake to pardon them who believe. Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world.'

Dost thou believe on the Son of God?' Through this Man is preached the remission of sins.'

MHCC: Lev 16:15-34

Here are typified the two great gospel privileges, of the remission of sin, and access to God, both of which we owe to our Lord Jesus. See the expiation of guilt. Christ is both the Maker and the Matter of the atonement; for he is the Priest, the High Priest, that makes reconciliation for the sins of the people. And as Christ is the High Priest, so he is the Sacrifice with which atonement is made; for he is all in all in our reconciliation to God. Thus he was figured by the two goats. The slain goat was a type of Christ dying for our sins; the scapegoat a type of Christ rising again for our justification. The atonement is said to be completed by putting the sins of Israel upon the head of the goat, which was sent away into a wilderness, a land not inhabited; and the sending away of the goat represented the free and full remission of their sins. He shall bear upon him all their iniquities. Thus Christ, the Lamb of God, takes away the sin of the world, by taking it upon himself, Joh 1:29. The entrance into heaven, which Christ made for us, was typified by the high priest's entrance into the most holy place. See Heb 9:7. The high priest was to come out again; but our Lord Jesus ever lives, making intercession, and always appears in the presence of God for us. Here are typified the two great gospel duties of faith and repentance. By faith we put our hands upon the head of the offering; relying on Christ as the Lord our Righteousness, pleading his satisfaction, as that which alone is able to atone for our sins, and procure us a pardon. By repentance we afflict our souls; not only fasting for a time from the delights of the body, but inwardly sorrowing for sin, and living a life of self-denial, assuring ourselves, that if we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. By the atonement we obtain rest for our souls, and all the glorious liberties of the children of God. Sinner, get the blood of Christ effectually applied to thy soul, or else thou canst never look God in the face with any comfort or acceptance. Take this blood of Christ, apply it by faith, and see how it atones with God.

Matthew Henry: Lev 16:20-28

The high priest having presented unto the Lord the expiatory sacrifices, by the sprinkling of their blood, the remainder of which, it is probable, he poured out at the foot of the brazen altar, 1. He is next to confess the sins of Israel, with both his hands upon the head of the scape-goat (Lev 16:20, Lev 16:21); and whenever hands were imposed upon the head of any sacrifice it was always done with confession, according as the nature of the sacrifice was; and, this being a sin-offering, it must be a confession of sin. In the latter and more degenerate ages of the Jewish church they had a set form of confession prepared for the high priest, but God here prescribed none; for it might be supposed that the high priest was so well acquainted with the state of the people, and had such a tender concern for them, that he needed not any form. The confession must be as particular as he could make it, not only of all the iniquities of the children of Israel, but all their transgressions in all their sins. In one sin there may be many transgressions, from the several aggravating circumstances of it; and in our confessions we should take notice of them, and not only say, I have sinned, but, with Achan, "Thus and thus have I done."By this confession he must put the sins of Israel upon the head of the goat; that is, exercising faith upon the divine appointment which constituted such a translation, he must transfer the punishment incurred from the sinners to the sacrifice, which would have been but a jest, nay, an affront to God, if he himself had not ordained it. 2. The goat was then to be sent away immediately by the hand of a fit person pitched upon for the purpose, into a wilderness, a land not inhabited; and God allowed them to make this construction of it, that the sending away of the goat was the sending away of their sins, by a free and full remission: He shall bear upon him all their iniquities, Lev 16:22. The losing of the goat was a sign to them that the sins of Israel should be sought for, and not found, Jer 50:20. The later Jews had a custom to tie one shred of scarlet cloth to the horns of the goat and another to the gate of the temple, or to the top of the rock where the goat was lost, and they concluded that if it turned white, as they say it usually did, the sins of Israel were forgiven, as it is written, Though your sins have been as scarlet, they shall be as wool: and they add that for forty years before the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans the scarlet cloth never changed colour at all, which is a fair confession that, having rejected the substance, the shadow stood them in no stead. 3. The high priest must then put off his linen garments in the tabernacle, and leave them there, the Jews say never to be worn again by himself or any other, for they made new ones every year; and he must bathe himself in water, put on his rich clothes, and then offer both his own and the people's burnt-offerings, Lev 16:23, Lev 16:24. When we have the comfort of our pardon God must have the glory of it. If we have the benefit of the sacrifice of atonement, we must not grudge the sacrifices of acknowledgment. And, it should seem, the burning of the fat of the sin-offering was deferred till now (Lev 16:25), that it might be consumed with the burnt-offerings. 4. The flesh of both those sin-offerings whose blood was taken within the veil was to be all burnt, not upon the altar, but at a distance without the camp, to signify both our putting away sin by true repentance, and the spirit of burning, and God's putting it away by a full remission, so that it shall never rise up in judgment against us. 5. He that took the scape-goat into the wilderness, and those that burned the sin-offering, were to be looked upon as ceremonially unclean, and must not come into the camp till they had washed their clothes and bathed their flesh in water, which signified the defiling nature of sin; even the sacrifice which was but made sin was defiling: also the imperfection of the legal sacrifices; they were so far from taking away sin that even they left some stain upon those that touched them. 6. When all this was done, the high priest went again into the most holy place to fetch his censer, and so returned to his own house with joy, because he had done his duty, and died not.

Keil-Delitzsch: Lev 16:20-22

After the completion of the expiation and cleansing of the holy things, Aaron was to bring up the live goat, i.e., to have it brought before the altar of burnt-offering, and placing both his hands upon its head, to confess all the sins and transgressions of the children of Israel upon it, and so put them upon its head. He was then to send the goat away into the desert by a man who was standing ready, that it might carry all its sins upon it into a land cut off; and there the man was to set the goat at liberty. עתּי , ἁπάξ λεγ. from עת an appointed time, signifies opportune, present at the right time, or ready. גּזרה , which is also met with in this passage alone, from גּזר to cut, or cut off, that which is severed, a country cut off from others, not connected by roads with any inhabited land. "The goat was not to find its way back"( Knobel ). To understand clearly the meaning of this symbolical rite, we must start from the fact, that according to the distinct words of Lev 16:5, the two goats were to serve as a sin-offering ( לחטּאת ). They were both of them devoted, therefore, to one and the same purpose, as was pointed out by the Talmudists, who laid down the law on that very account, that they were to be exactly alike, colore, statura, et valore . The living goat, therefore, is not to be regarded merely as the bearer of the sin to be taken away, but as quite as truly a sin-offering as the one that was slaughtered. It was appointed עליו לכפּר (Lev 16:10), i.e., not that an expiatory rite might be performed over it, for על with כּפּר always applies to the object of the expiation, but properly to expiate it, i.e., to make it the object of the expiation, or make expiation with it. To this end the sins of the nation were confessed upon it with the laying on of hands, and thus symbolically laid upon its head, that it might bear them, and when sent into the desert carry them away thither. The sins, which were thus laid upon its head by confession, were the sins of Israel, which had already been expiated by the sacrifice of the other goat. To understand, however, how the sins already expiated could still be confessed and laid upon the living goat, it is not sufficient to say, with Bähr, that the expiation with blood represented merely a covering or covering up of the sin, and that in order to impress upon the expiation the stamp of the greatest possible completeness and perfection, a supplement was appended, which represented the carrying away and removal of the sin. For in the case of every sin-offering for the congregation, in addition to the covering or forgiveness of sin represented by the sprinkling of blood, the removal or abolition of it was also represented by the burning of the flesh of the sacrifice; and this took place in the present instance also. As both goats were intended for a sin-offering, the sins of the nation were confessed upon both, and placed upon the heads of both by the laying on of hands; though it is of the living goat only that this is expressly recorded, being omitted in the case of the other, because the rule laid down in Lev 4:4. was followed.

(Note: The distinction, that in the case of all the other sacrifices the (one) hand is ordered to be laid upon the victim, whilst here both hands are ordered to be laid upon the goat, does not constitute an essential difference, as Hoffmann supposes; but the laying on of both hands rendered the act more solemn and expressive, in harmony with the solemnity of the whole proceeding.)

By both Israel was delivered from all sins and transgressions; but by the one, upon which the lot "for Jehovah"fell, it was so with regard to Jehovah; by the other, upon which the lot "for Azazel"fell, with regard to Azazel. With regard to Jehovah, or in relation to Jehovah, the sins were wiped away by the sacrifice of the goat; the sprinkling of the blood setting forth their forgiveness, and the burning of the animal the blotting of them out; and with this the separation of the congregation from Jehovah because of its sin was removed, and living fellowship with God restored. But Israel had also been brought by its sin into a distinct relation to Azazel, the head of the evil spirits; and it was necessary that this should be brought to an end, if reconciliation with God was to be perfectly secured. This complete deliverance from sin and its author was symbolized in the leading away of the goat, which had been laden with the sins, into the desert. This goat was to take back the sins, which God had forgiven to His congregation, into the desert to Azazel, the father of all sin, in the one hand as a proof that his evil influences upon men would be of no avail in the case of those who had received expiation from God, and on the other hand as a proof to the congregation also that those who were laden with sin could not remain in the kingdom of God, but would be banished to the abode of evil spirits, unless they were redeemed therefrom. This last point, it is true, is not expressly mentioned in the test; but it is evident from the fate which necessarily awaited the goat, when driven into the wilderness in the "land cut off."It would be sure to perish out there in the desert, that is to say, to suffer just what a winner would have to endure if his sins remained upon him; though probably it is only a later addition, not founded in the law, which we find in the Mishnah, Joma vi. 6, viz., that the goat was driven headlong from a rock in the desert, and dashed to pieces at the foot. There is not the slightest idea of presenting a sacrifice to Azazel. This goat was a sin-offering, only so far as it was laden with the sins of the people to carry them away into the desert; and in this respect alone is there a resemblance between the two goats and the two birds used in the purification of the leper (Lev 14:4.), of which the one to be set free was bathed in the blood of the one that was killed. In both cases the reason for making use of two animals is to be found purely in the physical impossibility of combining all the features, that had to be set forth in the sin-offering, in one single animal.

Constable: Lev 1:1--16:34

I. The public worship of the Israelites chs. 1--16

Leviticus continues revelation concerning the second of three elements necessary for any nation to exist, namely, a people (Gen. 12:10--Exod. 19), their law (Exod. 20--Num. 10:10), and their land (Num. 10:11--Josh. 24).

Leviticus is essentially a narrative document that relates the events that transpired in the life of the Israelites while the nation camped at the base of Mt. Sinai. However most of the material in the book is legal in genre. The legal sections prepare the reader to understand the narrative sections not only in Leviticus but also in Numbers and the rest of the Bible. There are two clear narrative sections (chs. 8-10; 24:10-23). However the hinge chapter in the book, chapter 16, reads as narrative even though it is legislative material.

A Legal chs. 1-7

B Narrative chs. 8-10

A Legal chs. 11-15

C Legal written as narrative ch. 16

A Legal 17:1-24:9

B Narrative 24:10-23

A Legal chs. 25-27

The first major section of Leviticus deals with how the Israelites were to conduct their public life as an expression of worship to God.

"The fact that the covenant between Yahweh and Israel was modeled after those of the ancient Near East in both form and function allows one to understand the myriad of cultic detail in the Pentateuch with unusual clarity. The sacrifices and offerings were designed to demonstrate the subservience of Israel, to atone for her offenses against her Sovereign, Yahweh, and to reflect the harmoniousness and peaceableness of the relationship thus established or reestablished."¹⁶

"Put differently, the main concern of Leviticus 1-16 is the continuance of the presence of God in the midst of the sinful nation, while Leviticus 17-27 records the effect of the presence of God upon the congregation. Consequently the abiding presence of God in the midst of the nation spans the entire contents of the Book of Leviticus."¹⁷

Constable: Lev 16:1-34

D. The Day of Atonement ch. 16

The sacrifices and offerings that Moses described thus far in the law were not sufficient to cleanse all the defilement that the sins of the people created. Much sinfulness still needed covering. Therefore God appointed a yearly sacrifice that cleansed all the sins not covered by other means that the Israelites committed ignorantly (Heb. 9:7). The sacrifice of the Day of Atonement was the highest and most comprehensive of the Mosaic sacrifices.

This chapter is a theological pivot on which the whole Book of Leviticus turns. It is the climax of the first part of the book that deals with the public worship of the Israelites (chs. 1-16). The second major part of Leviticus begins at the end of this chapter and reveals the private worship of the Israelites (chs. 17-27).

The chapter begins with a reference back to chapter 10, the judgment of Nadab and Abihu (v. 1). The material in chapter 16 is legislation that God prescribed shortly after and in view of that apostasy. Chapter 10 showed how important it was for priests to approach God with due care and self-preparation; those who did not died. Chapter 16 contains information about how the high priest must behave to preserve himself from a similar fate. There is this tie to the narrative of Israel's history, but chapter 16 is also a continuation of the legislation designed to differentiate between clean and unclean contained in chapters 11-15. It is another block of legal material, though the style is quite discursive.

The Day of Atonement took place six months after the Passover. These two great festivals were half a year apart. Whereas the Passover was a day of great rejoicing, the Day of Atonement was a time of great solemnity in Israel.

Constable: Lev 16:11-28

2. Instructions concerning the ritual 16:11-28

More detail follows in this section that helped Aaron know exactly how to conduct the cultic ritual.

Constable: Lev 16:20-22

The scapegoat 16:20-22

These verses describe the fourth and most striking phase of this day's ceremony. The second goat symbolically bore the sins of the people taking them to an unclean place far from God. There is difference of opinion among the authorities about what "Azazel" means (vv. 8, 10, 26). The etymology of this Hebrew word is obscure. Some believe it means a rocky precipice or some other place where the goat died or that it refers to the goat's function. Others think it refers to a demon to whom the Israelites sins were returned so it would not accuse them. Whatever its exact meaning, the symbolism is clear enough. The live goat symbolically removed the sins of the Israelites from God's presence.

The two goats used in the ritual represented two aspects of the atonement that God provided. Both animals taught the Israelites that a sinless agent was removing their sins by vicarious atonement. The goat slain represented the judgment on sin that resulted in death necessary for atonement. The goat sent off into the wilderness with the sinner's guilt imputed to it symbolized the removal of guilt (cf. 14:4-7).¹⁷⁸

There were two forms of the laying on of hands in the Old Testament. The Jews performed one by placing two hands on persons in nonsacrificial contexts. They performed the other by placing one hand on animals when they sacrificed them (v. 21). The two-handed form emphasized who the recipient of the ritual action was. The one-handed form drew attention to the person who put his hand on the animal.¹⁷⁹ Another view is that the imposition of two hands intensified the idea of transferring guilt, specifically for intentional sins.¹⁸⁰

Guzik: Lev 16:1-34

Leviticus 16 - The Day of Atonement

A. Preparation for sacrifice on the Day of Atonement.

1. (1-2) How Aaron should not come into the Holy Place.

Now the LORD spoke to Moses after the death of the two sons of Aaron, when they offered profane fire before the LORD, and died; and the LORD said to Moses: "Tell Aaron your brother not to come at just any time into the Holy Place inside the veil, before the mercy seat which is on the ark, lest he die; for I will appear in the cloud above the mercy seat."

a. The LORD spoke to Moses after the death of the two sons of Aaron: Nadab and Abihu were struck down by the LORD because they came into the Holy Place and offered profane fire before the LORD (Leviticus 10).

b. Tell Aaron your brother not to come at just any time into the Holy Place inside the veil: Therefore, Aaron could not come into the Holy Place any time he pleased, but only at God's invitation and at the appointed time and place.

i. The same is true today: We can only come into God's Holy Place at His invitation. Blessedly, the access has been opened wide because of Jesus' work on the cross for us. Romans 5:1-2 specifically says that because of Jesus' work on our behalf, we have standing access to God.

2. (3-5) What Aaron needs to bring with him when he goes into the Holy Place.

"Thus Aaron shall come into the Holy Place: with the blood of a young bull as a sin offering, and of a ram as a burnt offering. He shall put the holy linen tunic and the linen trousers on his body; he shall be girded with a linen sash, and with the linen turban he shall be attired. These are holy garments. Therefore he shall wash his body in water, and put them on. And he shall take from the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats as a sin offering, and one ram as a burnt offering."

a. With the blood of a young bull as a sin offering: Aaron must come with sacrificial blood to cleanse his own sin and the sin of the nation.

b. He shall put the holy linen tunic and the linen trousers on his body: Aaron must come clothed with garments of humility. Over his ornate garments for glory and for beauty (Exodus 28:2), he wore a holy linen tunic and the linen trousers. He was clothed in simple, humble white.

c. He shall wash his body in water: Aaron must come washed. Traditionally, this washing was done by immersion.

d. He shall take from the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats: Aaron must come with two goats and one ram to complete the offering of atonement.

i. This was extensive preparation for an important day. To the ancient Jews the Day of Atonement was called "the great day" or sometimes even just "the day." It was and remains the only day of commanded fasting on the Jewish calendar. Modern Jews still regard Yom Kippur an important day of fasting, soul searching, and righting wrongs - yet they offer no sacrifice for sin.

B. What the High Priest does on the Day of Atonement.

1. (6-10) Casting lots to choose between the two goats.

"Aaron shall offer the bull as a sin offering, which is for himself, and make atonement for himself and for his house. He shall take the two goats and present them before the LORD at the door of the tabernacle of meeting. Then Aaron shall cast lots for the two goats: one lot for the LORD and the other lot for the scapegoat. And Aaron shall bring the goat on which the Lord's lot fell, and offer it as a sin offering. But the goat on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, and to let it go as the scapegoat into the wilderness."

a. Aaron shall offer the bull as a sin offering, which is for himself: After the sacrificing the bull as a sin offering for himself (detailed in Leviticus 16:11-14), the high priest cast lots to choose between the two goats.

i. The Talmud stipulated that the two goats be as alike as possible - in size, color, and value.

b. Then Aaron shall cast lots for the two goats: one lot for the LORD and the other lot for the scapegoat: One goat was for the LORD and would be sacrificed as a sin offering and one goat would be the scapegoat and would be released to the wilderness. Each goat had an important role on the Day of Atonement.

i. The scapegoat was literally the "escape goat." It escaped death and went into the wilderness. Scapegoat translates the Hebrew word azazel. "The meaning of this word is far from certain . . . The word may perhaps signify 'removal' or 'dismissal' . . . Probably the best explanation is that the word was a rare technical term describing 'complete removal.'" (Harrison)

ii. There were elaborate Jewish traditions about Azazel, saying he was a demonic being that the Messiah would defeat. More likely, azazel simply refered to this goat's function of symbolically removing sin from Israel.

2. (11-14) The bull for the sin offering.

"And Aaron shall bring the bull of the sin offering, which is for himself, and make atonement for himself and for his house, and shall kill the bull as the sin offering which is for himself. Then he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from the altar before the LORD, with his hands full of sweet incense beaten fine, and bring it inside the veil. And he shall put the incense on the fire before the LORD, that the cloud of incense may cover the mercy seat that is on the Testimony, lest he die. He shall take some of the blood of the bull and sprinkle it with his finger on the mercy seat on the east side; and before the mercy seat he shall sprinkle some of the blood with his finger seven times."

a. The bull of the sin offering, which is for himself: This sin offering was for himself and for his house. Before the high priest could make atonement for the nation, he had to make atonement for himself.

i. When Jesus offered a perfect atonement for sin, He did not need to make a sin offering for Himself: For such a High Priest was fitting for us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and has become higher than the heavens; who does not need daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the people's, for this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. For the law appoints as high priests men who have weakness, but the word of the oath, which came after the law, appoints the Son who has been perfected forever. (Hebrews 7:26-28)

b. He shall take some of the blood of the bull and sprinkle it with his finger on the mercy seat: The blood of this sin offering had to be sprinkled on the mercy seat, which was the lid to the ark of the covenant, which sat in the Holy Place. When he came into the Holy Place, he had to come with a smoking censer that gave off a cloud of incense.

i. According to Jewish tradition, it was on the Day of Atonement that the high priest - and only the high priest - could pronounce the name of God, the sacred Tetragrammaton YHWH. When he entered the Holy Place with the blood of the goat set apart to the LORD, he would utter the name. He was the only one, and that was the only time, when the name could be uttered, and the high priest was to pass on the exact pronunciation of the name of God to his successor with his dying breath.

c. Before the mercy seat he shall sprinkle some of the blood: The idea was that God was above the mercy seat (I will appear in the cloud above the mercy seat, Leviticus 16:2), and as He looked down upon the ark of the covenant, He saw the sin of man. Man's sin was represented by the items in the ark of the covenant: Manna Israel complained about, tablets of law Israel broke, and a budding almond rod given as a response to Israel's rebellion. Then, the high priest sprinkled atoning blood seven times on the mercy seat - covering over the emblems of Israel's sin. God saw the blood cover over the sin, and atonement was made.

i. This captures the thought behind the Hebrew word for atonement: Kipper, which means, "to cover." Sin was not removed, but covered over by sacrificial blood. The New Testament idea of atonement is that our sin is not merely covered, but removed - taken away, so there is no barrier between God and man any longer.

3. (15-19) The goat selected for sacrifice is offered to make atonement for the tabernacle.

"Then he shall kill the goat of the sin offering, which is for the people, bring its blood inside the veil, do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bull, and sprinkle it on the mercy seat and before the mercy seat. So he shall make atonement for the Holy Place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions, for all their sins; and so he shall do for the tabernacle of meeting which remains among them in the midst of their uncleanness. There shall be no man in the tabernacle of meeting when he goes in to make atonement in the Holy Place, until he comes out, that he may make atonement for himself, for his household, and for all the assembly of Israel. And he shall go out to the altar that is before the LORD, and make atonement for it, and shall take some of the blood of the bull and some of the blood of the goat, and put it on the horns of the altar all around. Then he shall sprinkle some of the blood on it with his finger seven times, cleanse it, and consecrate it from the uncleanness of the children of Israel."

a. Then he shall kill the goat of the sin offering: The goat that was sacrificed was also like Jesus, in that the goat was spotless, was from the people of Israel (Leviticus 16:5), was chosen by God (Leviticus 16:8), and the goat's blood was taken to the Holy Place to provide atonement.

b. So he shall make atonement for the Holy Place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel: This blood was applied to the mercy seat, but also the tabernacle and altar itself. This blood cleansed the house of God itself, which was made ceremonially unclean by man's constant touch.

4. (20-22) The release of the scapegoat.

"And when he has made an end of atoning for the Holy Place, the tabernacle of meeting, and the altar, he shall bring the live goat. Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, confess over it all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions, concerning all their sins, putting them on the head of the goat, and shall send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a suitable man. The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to an uninhabited land; and he shall release the goat in the wilderness."

a. When he has made an end of atoning for the Holy Place: After the high priest's sin was dealt with and after the tabernacle itself was cleansed, Aaron then dealt with the sin of the people through the transference of sin and release of the scapegoat.

b. He shall release the goat in the wilderness: This was a perfect demonstration of atonement under the Old Covenant, before the completed work of Jesus on the cross. Sin could be put away, but never really eliminated. The sin-bearing goat, bearing the sin of Israel, was alive somewhere but put away.

i. One ancient Rabbi says the goat was taken ten miles out of Jerusalem, and there were refreshment stations each mile along the way for the man who escorted the goat out of the city. He finally went the ten miles and then watched the goat wander off until he could see the goat no more. Then the sin was gone and the Day of Atonement was considered complete.

ii. Sin was put away - but not completely. How could one know for certain that God had accepted the sacrifice on the Day of Atonement? What if someone accidentally encountered the scapegoat in the wilderness? What if the scapegoat wandered back among the people of Israel? Through their traditions, the Jews began to deal with these concerns. "On the head of the scape-goat a piece of scarlet cloth was tied, and the tradition of the Jews states that if God accepted the sacrifice the scarlet cloth turned white while the goat was led to the desert; but if God had not accepted this expiation, the redness continued, and the rest of the year was spent in mourning." (Clarke) Through this, they thought to have a certainty about the work of atonement.

iii. It seems that later the Jewish people altered the ceremony so the goat would be killed and have no chance of contacting Israel again. "The Jews write, that this goat was carried to the mountain called Azazel, whence the goat is so called; and that there he was cast headlong; and that the red string by which he was led turned white when God was pleased with the Israelites, otherwise it remained red; and they mourned all that year." (Poole)

iv. "And the ancient Hebrews write, that forty years before the destruction of the temple, which was about the time of Christ's death, this red string turned no more white." (Poole) When Jesus' blood red body rose from the dead, clothed with white garments, it was proof forever that the red had changed to white - and atonement at the cross was perfect and complete.

5. (23-28) Completion of the sacrifices.

"Then Aaron shall come into the tabernacle of meeting, shall take off the linen garments which he put on when he went into the Holy Place, and shall leave them there. And he shall wash his body with water in a holy place, put on his garments, come out and offer his burnt offering and the burnt offering of the people, and make atonement for himself and for the people. The fat of the sin offering he shall burn on the altar. And he who released the goat as the scapegoat shall wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and afterward he may come into the camp. The bull for the sin offering and the goat for the sin offering, whose blood was brought in to make atonement in the Holy Place, shall be carried outside the camp. And they shall burn in the fire their skins, their flesh, and their offal. Then he who burns them shall wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and afterward he may come into the camp."

a. He shall wash his body with water in a holy place: After releasing the scapegoat, the high priest and the one who released the scapegoat washed and the sin offering and burnt offering would be completed.

b. Take off the linen garments . . . put on his garments: When atonement was finished, the priest emerged from the tabernacle in glory - with the humble garments taken off and in his normal clothes for glory and beauty.

i. On the Day of Atonement, the high priest was humble (Leviticus 16:4), he was spotless (Leviticus 16:11), and he was alone (Leviticus 16:11-14), and he emerged victorious - just like Jesus was in accomplishing our work of atonement.

6. (29-31) What the people did on the Day of Atonement.

"This shall be a statute forever for you: In the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall afflict your souls, and do no work at all, whether a native of your own country or a stranger who dwells among you. For on that day the priest shall make atonement for you, to cleanse you, that you may be clean from all your sins before the LORD. It is a sabbath of solemn rest for you, and you shall afflict your souls. It is a statute forever."

a. You shall afflict your souls: In contrast to other national days of gathering, the Day of Atonement was a day to afflict your souls. That is, it was a day of fasting and rest - a sabbath of solemn rest.

i. Modern Jews who do observe the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) typically fast for that day. Yet they have no sacrifice for sins.

· Some Jews consider their own sacrifice to be a suitable substitute; today some sacrifice a rooster for every male in the family, and a hen for every female, on the day of atonement - a vague shadow of obedience to Leviticus 16.

· Some Jews consider charity a suitable substitute for sacrifice; the word "charity" in modern Hebrew is the same as the word for "righteousness."

· Some Jews consider sufferings a suitable substitute for sacrifice; among the Jews of Eastern Europe there used to be custom to inflict 39 lashes upon themselves on the Day of Atonement.

· Some Jews consider good works or the study of the law as suitable substitutes for sacrifice.

b. That you may be clean from all your sins before the LORD: God wanted them to afflict themselves so they could identify with the sacrifice for sin. Afflicting the soul brought the Israelite into sympathy with the afflicted sacrificial victim, even as the believer identifies with Jesus Christ on the cross.

c. It is a sabbath of solemn rest for you: This sabbath of solemn rest demanded a cessation of works, even as the believer is justified and finds atonement apart from his own works, being justified by the work of another. This means that all the charity, all the sufferings, all the study of the law in the world cannot atone for sin - we must rest in the finished work of Jesus Christ on our behalf.

i. Yom Kippur ends with the blowing of the Shofar, the trumpet that heralds the coming of the Messiah. An ancient prayer in a Jewish Day of Atonement liturgy reads:

Our righteous Messiah has departed from us,

We are horror-stricken, and have none to justify us.

Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions

He carries who is wounded because of our transgressions

He bears on His shoulder the burden of our sins.

To find pardon for all our iniquities.

By His stripes we shall be healed -

O Eternal One, it is time that thou should create Him anew!

7. (32-34) What the high priest does on the Day of Atonement.

"And the priest, who is anointed and consecrated to minister as priest in his father's place, shall make atonement, and put on the linen clothes, the holy garments; then he shall make atonement for the Holy Sanctuary, and he shall make atonement for the tabernacle of meeting and for the altar, and he shall make atonement for the priests and for all the people of the assembly. This shall be an everlasting statute for you, to make atonement for the children of Israel, for all their sins, once a year." And he did as the LORD commanded Moses."

a. He shall make atonement for the Holy Sanctuary: This meant the priest and only the priest. Only once a year could any man - and then, only one man - enter into the Holy Place and come near the presence of God.

b. For all their sins, once a year: To this summary of what was previously described in the chapter is the reminder that this is to be done once a year.

i. Every year, year after year, this atonement had to be made, showing it was never completed. In contrast, Jesus provided a finished work: For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another; He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation. (Hebrews 9:24-28)

© 2004 David Guzik - No distribution beyond personal use without permission

Commentary -- Other

Critics Ask: Lev 16:20

LEVITICUS 16:6-22 —Why did God set up the procedure of the scapegoat, and what does it represent?

PROBLEM: Leviticus 16 sets up the procedure for the Day of Atonement of killing one goat as a sin offering to make atonement for the Holy Place, and then confessing the sins of Israel upon the head of another goat and sending it away into the wilderness. However, this does not present a unified picture, for there is only one sacrifice for our sins, not two ( Heb. 10:14 ).

SOLUTION: The procedure relating to the scapegoat does not present a confused or disunited picture of redemption. Each animal referred to in the description of the procedures to be taken on the Day of Atonement represents some aspect of the work of Christ in making a once for all atonement for our sins. The first goat was killed and his blood was shed ( Lev. 16:15 ), representing the substitutionary death of Christ and the shedding of His blood for our sins. The High Priest was then to take the scapegoat, to confess the sins of Israel upon the head of the goat, and to send it out into the wilderness. This represented the carrying away of Israel’s sins and symbolizes the work of Christ in bearing away our sins. As Isaiah 53:6 prophesied, “And the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” The various aspects of the work of Christ in redemption are symbolized by the different parts which the different animals played on the Day of Atonement.   

Critics Ask: Lev 16:21

LEVITICUS 16:6-22 —Why did God set up the procedure of the scapegoat, and what does it represent?

PROBLEM: Leviticus 16 sets up the procedure for the Day of Atonement of killing one goat as a sin offering to make atonement for the Holy Place, and then confessing the sins of Israel upon the head of another goat and sending it away into the wilderness. However, this does not present a unified picture, for there is only one sacrifice for our sins, not two ( Heb. 10:14 ).

SOLUTION: The procedure relating to the scapegoat does not present a confused or disunited picture of redemption. Each animal referred to in the description of the procedures to be taken on the Day of Atonement represents some aspect of the work of Christ in making a once for all atonement for our sins. The first goat was killed and his blood was shed ( Lev. 16:15 ), representing the substitutionary death of Christ and the shedding of His blood for our sins. The High Priest was then to take the scapegoat, to confess the sins of Israel upon the head of the goat, and to send it out into the wilderness. This represented the carrying away of Israel’s sins and symbolizes the work of Christ in bearing away our sins. As Isaiah 53:6 prophesied, “And the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” The various aspects of the work of Christ in redemption are symbolized by the different parts which the different animals played on the Day of Atonement.   

Critics Ask: Lev 16:22

LEVITICUS 16:6-22 —Why did God set up the procedure of the scapegoat, and what does it represent?

PROBLEM: Leviticus 16 sets up the procedure for the Day of Atonement of killing one goat as a sin offering to make atonement for the Holy Place, and then confessing the sins of Israel upon the head of another goat and sending it away into the wilderness. However, this does not present a unified picture, for there is only one sacrifice for our sins, not two ( Heb. 10:14 ).

SOLUTION: The procedure relating to the scapegoat does not present a confused or disunited picture of redemption. Each animal referred to in the description of the procedures to be taken on the Day of Atonement represents some aspect of the work of Christ in making a once for all atonement for our sins. The first goat was killed and his blood was shed ( Lev. 16:15 ), representing the substitutionary death of Christ and the shedding of His blood for our sins. The High Priest was then to take the scapegoat, to confess the sins of Israel upon the head of the goat, and to send it out into the wilderness. This represented the carrying away of Israel’s sins and symbolizes the work of Christ in bearing away our sins. As Isaiah 53:6 prophesied, “And the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” The various aspects of the work of Christ in redemption are symbolized by the different parts which the different animals played on the Day of Atonement.   

Introduction / Outline

JFB: Leviticus (Book Introduction)

LEVITICUS. So called from its treating of the laws relating to the ritual, the services, and sacrifices of the Jewish religion, the superintendence of which was entrusted to the Levitical priesthood. It is chiefly, however, the duties of the priests, "the sons of Aaron," which this book describes; and its claim to be the work of Moses is established by the following passages:-- 2Ch 30:16; Neh 8:14; Jer 7:22-23; Eze 20:11 Mat 8:4; Luk 2:22; Joh 8:5; Rom 10:4; Rom 13:9; 2Co 6:16; Gal 3:12; 1Pe 1:16.

JFB: Leviticus (Outline)

• BURNT OFFERINGS OF THE HERD. (Lev. 1:1-17)
• THE MEAT OFFERINGS. (Lev. 2:1-16)
• THE PEACE OFFERING OF THE HERD. (Lev. 3:1-17)
• SIN OFFERING OF IGNORANCE. (Lev 4:1-2)
• SIN OFFERING FOR THE PRIEST. (Lev. 4:3-35)
• TRESPASS OFFERINGS FOR CONCEALING KNOWLEDGE. (Lev 5:1)
• TOUCHING ANY THING UNCLEAN. (Lev 5:2-3)
• FOR SWEARING. (Lev 5:4-19)
• TRESPASS OFFERING FOR SINS DONE WITTINGLY. (Lev 6:1-7)
• THE LAW OF THE BURNT OFFERING. (Lev 6:8-13)
• THE LAW OF THE MEAT OFFERING. (Lev 6:14-18)
• THE HIGH PRIEST'S MEAT OFFERING. (Lev 6:19-23)
• THE LAW OF THE SIN OFFERING. (Lev 6:21-30)
• THE LAW OF THE TRESPASS OFFERING. (Lev. 7:1-27)
• THE PRIESTS' PORTION. (Lev 7:28-38)
• MOSES CONSECRATES AARON AND HIS SONS. (Lev. 8:1-36)
• THE PRIESTS' ENTRY INTO OFFICE. (Lev. 9:1-24)
• NADAB AND ABIHU BURNT. (Lev. 10:1-20)
• BEASTS THAT MAY AND MAY NOT BE EATEN. (Lev. 11:1-47)
• WOMAN'S UNCLEANNESS BY CHILDBIRTH. (Lev 12:1-8)
• THE LAWS AND TOKENS IN DISCERNING LEPROSY. (Lev. 13:1-59)
• THE RITES AND SACRIFICES IN CLEANSING OF THE LEPER. (Lev. 14:1-57)
• UNCLEANNESS OF MEN. (Lev. 15:1-18)
• UNCLEANNESS OF WOMEN. (Lev 15:19-33)
• HOW THE HIGH PRIEST MUST ENTER INTO THE HOLY PLACE. (Lev. 16:1-34)
• BLOOD OF BEASTS MUST BE OFFERED AT THE TABERNACLE DOOR. (Lev. 17:1-16)
• UNLAWFUL MARRIAGES. (Lev. 18:1-30)
• A REPETITION OF SUNDRY LAWS. (Lev. 19:1-37)
• GIVING ONE'S SEED TO MOLECH. (Lev. 20:1-27)
• OF THE PRIESTS' MOURNING. (Lev. 21:1-24)
• THE PRIESTS IN THEIR UNCLEANNESS. (Lev 22:1-9)
• WHO OF THE PRIESTS' HOUSE MAY EAT OF THEM. (Lev 22:10-16)
• THE SACRIFICES MUST BE WITHOUT BLEMISH. (Lev. 22:17-33)
• OF SUNDRY FEASTS. (Lev 23:1-4)
• THE PASSOVER. (Lev 23:5-8)
• THE SHEAF OF FIRST FRUITS. (Lev 23:9-14)
• FEAST OF PENTECOST. (Lev 23:15-22)
• FEAST OF TRUMPETS. (Lev 23:23-25)
• OIL FOR THE LAMPS. (Lev. 24:1-23)
• SABBATH OF THE SEVENTH YEAR. (Lev 25:1-7)
• THE JUBILEE. (Lev. 25:8-23)
• OF IDOLATRY. (Lev 26:1-2)
• A BLESSING TO THE OBEDIENT. (Lev 26:3-13)
• A CURSE TO THE DISOBEDIENT. (Lev. 26:14-39)
• CONCERNING VOWS. (Lev. 27:1-18)

TSK: Leviticus (Book Introduction)

Leviticus is a most interesting and important book; a book containing a code of sacrificial, ceremonial, civil, and judicial laws, which, for the purity of their morality, the wisdom, justice, and beneficence of their enactments, and the simplicity, dignity, and impressive nature of their rites, are perfectly unrivalled, and altogether worthy of their Divine Author. All the rites and ceremonies of the Mosaic law are at once dignified and expressive. They point out the holiness of their Author, the sinfulness of man, the necessity of an atonement, and the state of moral excellence to which the grace and mercy of the Creator have destined to raise the human soul. They include, as well as point out, the gospel of the Son of God; from which they receive their consummation and perfection. The sacrifices and oblations were significant of the atonement of Christ; the requisite qualities of these sacrifices were emblematical of his immaculate character; and the prescribed mode in the form of these offerings, and the mystical rites ordained, were allusive institutions, calculated to enlighten the apprehensions of the Jews, and to prepare them for the reception of the Gospel. The institution of the high priesthood typified Jesus, the Great High Priest, called and prepared of God, who hath an unchangeable priesthood, and is able to save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him.

TSK: Leviticus 16 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Lev 16:1, How the high priest must enter into the holy place; Lev 16:11, The sin offering for himself; Lev 16:15, The sin offering for the people; Lev 16:20, The scape-goat; Lev 16:29, The yearly feast of the expiations.

Poole: Leviticus (Book Introduction)

THIRD BOOK OF MOSES CALLED LEVITICUS

THE ARGUMENT

This Book, containing the actions of about one month’ s space, acquainteth us with the Levitical ceremonies used after the tabernacle was erected and anointed in the wilderness, and is therefore called LEVITICUS. It treats of laws concerning persons and things, clean and unclean, by infirmity or accident; as also purifyings in general once a year, and divers particular cleansings, with a brief repetition of divers laws, Le 19 , together with certain feasts, of seven years’ rest, of the jubilee, and the redemption of things consecrated to God, &c.; but especially of such ceremonies as were used about offerings and sacrifices, which were both expiatory, for trespasses wittingly or unwittingly committed, whether by the people or the priests; and also eucharistical, in the owning of God’ s blessings. Here are declared also laws for the regulating of these, and prescribing the lawful time for marriages. Here is set down how several abominable sins are punishable by the magistrate; and how these things are to be managed by certain persons appropriated to the tribe of Levi, whose office is confirmed from heaven, and the maladministration of it threatened, and the judgment particularly inflicted on Nadab and Abihu for an example. Here are also promises and threatenings to the observers or breakers of this law.

Poole: Leviticus 16 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 16

Aaron not permitted at all times to go into the holy of holies, Lev 16:1,2 . He is commanded to make a general expiation, and wherewith, Lev 16:3-5 . He-goats, the one for sacrifice, the other to escape, Lev 16:7,8 . The manner of offering, Lev 16:9-14 , and ministering the sacrifice, Lev 16:15-19 . The scape-goat, with the sins of the people laid on his head, sent into the wilderness, Lev 16:20-22 ; after which Aaron, and he who let go the goat, and he who burnt the sacrifice without the camp, must wash themselves, Lev 16:23-28 . This day of expiation, which was on the tenth day of the seventh month, to be a solemn fast and sabbath of rest, and they cleansed from all their sins, Lev 16:29-34 .

MHCC: Leviticus (Book Introduction)

God ordained divers kinds of oblations and sacrifices, to assure his people of the forgiveness of their offences, if they offered them in true faith and obedience. Also he appointed the priests and Levites, their apparel, offices, conduct, and portion. He showed what feasts they should observe, and at what times. He declared by these sacrifices and ceremonies, that the reward of sin is death, and that without the blood of Christ, the innocent Lamb of God, there can be no forgiveness of sins.

MHCC: Leviticus 16 (Chapter Introduction)

(Lev 16:1-14) The great day of atonement.

(v. 15-34) The sacrifices on it, The scapegoat.

Matthew Henry: Leviticus (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Third Book of Moses, Called Leviticus

There is nothing historical in all this book of Leviticus except the account which it gives us of the consecration of the priesthood (ch. 8-9), of the punishment of Nadab and Abihu, by the hand of God, for offering strange fire (ch. 10), and of Shelomith's son, by the hand of the magistrate, for blasphemy (ch. 24). All the rest of the book is taken up with the laws, chiefly the ecclesiastical laws, which God gave to Israel by Moses, concerning their sacrifices and offerings, their meats and drinks, and divers washings, and the other peculiarities by which God set that people apart for himself, and distinguished them from other nations, all which were shadows of good things to come, which are realized and superseded by the gospel of Christ. We call the book Leviticus, from the Septuagint, because it contains the laws and ordinances of the levitical priesthood (as it is called, Heb 7:11), and the ministrations of it. The Levites were principally charged with these institutions, both to do their part and to teach the people theirs. We read, in the close of the foregoing book, of the setting up of the tabernacle, which was to be the place of worship; and, as that was framed according to the pattern, so must the ordinances of worship be, which were there to be administered. In these the divine appointment was as particular as in the former, and must be as punctually observed. The remaining record of these abrogated laws is of use to us, for the strengthening of our faith in Jesus Christ, as the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, and for the increase of our thankfulness to God, that by him we are freed from the yoke of the ceremonial law, and live in the times of reformation.

Matthew Henry: Leviticus 16 (Chapter Introduction)

In this chapter we have the institution of the annual solemnity of the day of atonement, or expiation, which had as much gospel in it as perhaps any of the appointments of the ceremonial law, as appears by the reference the apostle makes to it, Heb 9:7, etc. We had before divers laws concerning sin-offerings for particular persons, and to be offered upon particular occasions; but this is concerning the stated sacrifice, in which the whole nation was interested. The whole service of the day is committed to the high priest. I. He must never come into the most holy place but upon this day (Lev 16:1, Lev 16:2). II. He must come dressed in linen garments (Lev 16:4). III. He must bring a sin-offering and a burnt-offering for himself (Lev 16:3), offer his sin-offering (Lev 16:6-11), then go within the veil with some of the blood of his sin-offering, burn incense, and sprinkle the blood before the mercy-seat (Lev 16:12-14). IV. Two goats must be provided for the people, lots cast upon them, and, 1. One of them must be a sin-offering for the people (Lev 16:5, Lev 16:7-9), and the blood of it must be sprinkled before the mercy-seat (Lev 16:15-17), and then some of the blood of both the sin-offerings must be sprinkled upon the altar (Lev 16:18, Lev 16:19). 2. The other must be a scape-goat (Lev 16:10), the sins of Israel must be confessed over him, and then he must be sent away into the wilderness (Lev 16:20-22), and he that brought him away must be ceremonially unclean (Lev 16:26). V. The burnt-offerings were then to be offered, the fat of the sin-offerings burnt on the altar, and their flesh burnt without the camp (Lev 16:23-25, Lev 16:27, Lev 16:28). VI. The people were to observe the day religiously by a holy rest and holy mourning for sin; and this was to be a statute for ever (Lev 16:29, etc.).

Constable: Leviticus (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

The Hebrews derived the title of this book from the first word in it, wayyiqra', translated "And He [the Lord] called" (1:1). "And" or "then" is a conjunction that shows that what follows in Leviticus is a continuation of the narrative of Exodus. There is no break in the flow of thought. This is the third book of the Torah (Law).

The English title comes to us from the Vulgate (Latin version), which called this book Liber Leviticus. The Vulgate title came from the Septuagint (Greek version), which had as the title Leuitikon, meaning "relating to the Levites." This title is appropriate since the book contains requirements of the Mosaic Covenant that relate to the Levites, or more specifically, the priests.

"It would be wrong, however, to describe Leviticus simply as a manual for priests. It is equally, if not more, concerned with the part the laity should play in worship. Many of the regulations explain what the layman should sacrifice. They tell him when to go to the sanctuary, what to bring, and what he may expect the priest to do when he arrives. Most of the laws apply to all Israel: only a few sections specifically concern the priests alone, e.g., chs. 21-22. The lay orientation of the legislation is particularly noticeable in ch. 23, where the whole emphasis lies on the days that must be observed as days of sabbath rest."¹

Date and Writer

As I explained in the notes on Genesis, almost all Jewish and Christian scholars regarded Moses as the writer of all five books of the Law until about 100 years ago.²

God evidently revealed the material Moses recorded in Leviticus after He renewed the covenant with Israel (1:1).

Leviticus is unique in that it is largely a record of God's instructions to Moses.

"There is no book in the whole compass of that inspired Volume which the Holy Spirit has given us, that contains more of the very words of God than Leviticus. It is God that is the direct speaker in almost every page; His gracious words are recorded in the form wherein they were uttered."³

Scope

As mentioned, Leviticus contains revelation that was particularly appropriate for the priests. While ritual and legal matters predominate, Moses wove them into the historical narratives so as one reads Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers in order there is chronological movement forward. As we shall see, the legislation appears in the narrative at significant and reasonable places.

"The content of Leviticus supplements and completes that of Exodus in the religious and social spheres--and particularly the religious and ritual aspects of the covenant as made, broken and renewed actually at Sinai; this would be reflected by the terminal blessings and curses of Leviticus 26."⁴

"Leviticus enlarges upon matters involving the ordering of worship at the divine sanctuary that are mentioned only briefly in Exodus. Whereas the latter described the specifications and construction of the tabernacle, Leviticus narrates the way in which the priests are to care for the sanctuary and throne room of the Great King. The work is a fundamentally important legal treatise because it contains the regulations by which the religious and civil life of the Hebrew nation was to be governed once the land of Canaan was occupied."⁵

Historically the book fits within the one month between God's occupation of the tabernacle (Exod. 40:17, 34-38) and the taking of the census at Sinai (Num. 1:1-3). However because it contains so much legal material, we should consider it along with the rest of the Mosaic Law that God began to reveal in Exodus.

"It carries on to its completion the giving of the law at Sinai, which commenced at Ex. 25, and by which the covenant constitution was firmly established."⁶

Purpose

"Though the covenant arrangement up to this point clearly specified the need for Israel, the vassal, to appear before her Lord on stated occasions and singled out first Moses and then the priesthood as mediators in this encounter, there yet remained the need to describe the nature of the tribute to be presented, the precise meaning and function of the priesthood, the definition of holiness and unholiness, and a more strict clarification of the places and times of pilgrimage to the dwelling place of the great King. This is the purpose of the book of Leviticus."⁷

"The central theme of the book is holiness. The book intends to show how Israel was to fulfill its covenant responsibility to be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation' (Ex 19:6; Lev 26:5)."⁸

"How to maintain the vital covenantal relationship between the Israelites and their God is the concern of the book of Leviticus."⁹

"New Testament theology makes full use of the idea of holiness. All Christians are holy, saints' in most English translations. That is, they have been called by God to be his people just as ancient Israel had been (Col. 1:2; 1 Pet. 1:2; 2:9-10; cf. Exod. 19:5-6). But this state of holiness must find expression in holy living (Col. 1:22; 1 Pet. 1:15). Sanctification is expressed through obedience to the standard of teaching (Rom. 6:17-19), just as in Leviticus through obedience to the law. Peter urges his readers to make the motto of Leviticus their own: Be holy, for I am holy' (1 Pet. 1:16). The imitation of God is a theme that unites the ethics of Old and New Testaments (cf. Matt. 5:48; 1 Cor. 11:1)."¹⁰

". . . the principles underlying the OT are valid and authoritative for the Christian, but the particular applications found in the OT may not be. The moral principles are the same today, but insofar as our situation often differs from the OT setting, the application of the principles in our society may well be different now."¹¹

". . . the Levitical rituals are still of immense relevance. It was in terms of these sacrifices that Jesus himself and the early church understood his atoning death. Leviticus provided the theological models for their understanding. If we wish to walk in our Lord's steps and think his thoughts after him, we must attempt to understand the sacrificial system of Leviticus. It was established by the same God who sent his Son to die for us; and in rediscovering the principles of OT worship written there, we may learn something of the way we should approach a holy God."¹²

Importance

". . . it is no exaggeration to claim that the Book of Leviticus has had more impact on Judaism than any other book of the Old testament. Traditionally it was the first book taught to Jewish children, and over half the commentary of the Talmud is concerned with understanding its contents."¹³

Message¹⁴

The major theme of Leviticus is worship. Moses introduced this theme in the later chapters of Exodus, but he developed it more fully in Leviticus.

The book reveals how sinful Israelites could have a relationship with the holy God who dwelt among them. It also reveals how they could maintain that relationship and express it through worship.

One of the major revelations in Leviticus is the nature of sin. God took the fact that man is a sinner for granted in Leviticus. He established this in Genesis and Exodus. He clarified the nature of man's sinfulness in Leviticus. Sin has a three-fold character.

1. Sin is unlikeness to God. In the Creation we see man made in the image of God, but in the Fall we begin to see man's unlikeness to God. The whole system of worship in Leviticus teaches this truth. God is different from man ethically and morally. The word holy (Heb. kodesh) occurs over 150 times in Leviticus, more than in any other book of the Bible. The word occurs even in the sections of the book dealing with personal hygiene. Holy means pure, unblemished, clean, blameless. The opposite of holy is sinful. It is in contrast with God's holiness that we can understand man's sinfulness. Leviticus reveals the standards by which sinful people could have fellowship with a holy God. These standards and regulations point out the vast difference between the character of man and the character of God. God sees us as His Son as Christians (i.e., "in Christ").

2. Sin is essentially wrong that man does to God. To have a relationship with God, the wrong the redeemed sinner had done to God had to be atoned for. The Israelite did this wrong daily. It was the natural fruit of his sinful nature. Consequently he had to make payment for his sin periodically to God (monthly, seasonally, and yearly). God specified how the sinners were to pay for the wrong done Him, namely, by the offerings and sacrifices specified in the law. In Leviticus we learn that wrong done to another human being is wrong done to God. People belong to God, God gives them their lives in trust, and they bear God's image. When one person violates the basic rights of another, he has wronged not only that person but God too (cf. Gen. 39:9; Ps. 51:4). We too sin daily, but "Jesus paid it all." We could never compensate God adequately for the wrong we do to Him by sinning.

3. Sin results in distance from God. Because man is unlike God in his character, he is separate from God in his experience. The Israelites could not approach God except as God made a way and brought them near to Himself. The levitical system of worship illustrated the distance between man and God due to sin and the need for some provision to bring man back to God. The veil, the curtains, and the priests separated the ordinary Israelite from God. He doubtless sensed his personal separation from God as he participated in worship. Jesus tore the veil in two and opened access to God for us. After the Fall, Adam and Eve hid from God.

Another major revelation in Leviticus is the nature of atonement. Atonement is, of course, the solution to the problems that sin creates. Atonement means satisfaction. God covered the sins of the Israelites until a final, acceptable sacrifice would remove them completely. Old Testament saints obtained salvation on credit. (Ill. of a credit card) Through atonement man who is a sinner could enter into fellowship with God. Three things had to be present to make atonement for sin.

1. There had to be substitution. Every animal sacrifice in Israel involved the substitution of one life for another. A living being had to stand in the sinner's place and take the punishment for his sin. The substitute had to be sinless. Every sacrifice of an animal involved the death of an innocent substitute. Animals do not sin. They are not morally responsible.

2. There had to be imputation. God transferred the guilt of the sinner to his substitute when the sinner personally identified with his substitute by laying his hands on it. This ritual illustrated the transference of guilt for the Israelites.

3. There had to be death. Finally the substitute to which God had imputed guilt had to die. Atonement could not take place without death. The shedding of blood illustrated death. Blood is the essence of life (17:11). Bloodshed was a visual demonstration of life poured out. Sin always results in death (cf. Rom. 6:23). Clearly love lay behind this plan even though Moses did not explain why God provided atonement in Leviticus. God opened the way for sinners to have fellowship with Himself by providing for the covering of sins. God could have preserved His holiness and satisfied the demands of his justice by annihilating every sinner. However, God chose another way because He loves man.

A third major revelation in Leviticus is the nature of redemption. Redemption essentially means purchase. To redeem means to purchase for oneself. When God redeemed Israel in Egypt, He bought the nation for Himself. God then provided freedom so the Israelites could be His special treasure. Leviticus teaches three things about redemption.

1. Redemption rests on righteousness. Leviticus reveals that God did what was right to restore man to Himself. He did not simply dismiss sin as unimportant. He provided a way whereby the guilt of sin could be paid for righteously. Redemption rests on a payment to God, not pity.

2. Redemption is possible only by blood. The sacrificial shedding of blood is the giving up of life. The rites of animal sacrifice portrayed this graphically. People do not obtain redemption when they pour out their lives in service but by life poured out in death (cf. Heb. 9:22). Man's redemption cost God the life of His own Son ultimately.

3. Redemption should produce holiness. Redemption should lead to a manner of life that is separate from sin. Redemption does not excuse us from the responsibility of being holy. It gives us the opportunity to be holy. Holiness of life results from a relationship to God and fellowship (communion) with Him that redemption makes possible.

Redemption deals with the sinner's relationship to God whereas atonement deals with his relationship to sin. You have experienced redemption, but God has atoned for your sins.

I would summarize the message of Leviticus as follows on the basis of this three-fold emphasis on sin, atonement, and redemption. God has made provision for the covering of man's sin so man can have fellowship with God.

Genesis revealed that God made man in His own image to have fellowship with Himself. Man enjoyed that fellowship as long as he trusted and obeyed God. However when man ceased to trust and obey God, sin broke that fellowship. God then proceeded to demonstrate to fallen man that He is trustworthy, faithful. Those individuals who trusted and obeyed Him were able to enjoy fellowship with God again.

Exodus emphasized that God is also sovereign. He is the ultimate ruler of the universe who can and did redeem the nation of Israel. He did this so He could demonstrate to all people of all time how glorious it can be to live under the government of God.

Leviticus deals with how sinners can have fellowship with a holy God. Leviticus clarifies both the sinfulness of man and the holiness of God. The proper response of the redeemed sinner to a holy God is worship. Leviticus explains how Israel was to worship God. The Israelites worshipped God under the Old Covenant. Our worship is different because we live under the New Covenant.

Constable: Leviticus (Outline)

Outline

"At first sight the book of Leviticus might appear to be a haphazard, even repetitious arrangement of enactments involving the future life in Canaan of the Israelite people. Closer examination will reveal, however, that quite apart from the division of the work into two basic themes, many of the chapters have their own literary structure. Examples of this can be seen in material patterned after the fashion of a Mesopotamian tablet, with its title, textual content and colophon, as in Leviticus 1:3-7:37-38. Other chapters exhibit a distinct form of construction, which would doubtless prove extremely valuable for purposes of memorizing the contents. Examples of this are to be found in the triadic pattern of the leprosy regulations introduced by the phrase The Lord said to Moses' (Lv. 13:1; 14:1, 33), or the concentric arrangement of propositions (palistrophe) in Leviticus 24:16-22. A particularly attractive literary form is the introverted (chiastic) passage occurring in Leviticus 15:2-30, suggesting considerable artistic ability on the part of the writer."¹⁵

I. The public worship of the Israelites chs. 1-16

A. The laws of sacrifice chs. 1-7

1. The burnt offering ch. 1

2. The meal offering ch. 2

3. The peace offerings ch. 3

4. The sin offerings 4:1-5:13

5. The trespass offerings 5:14-6:7

6. Instructions for the priests concerning the offerings 6:8-7:38

B. The institution of the Aaronic priesthood chs. 8-10

1. The consecration of the priests and the sanctuary ch. 8

2. The entrance of Aaron and his sons into their office ch. 9

3. The sanctification of the priesthood ch. 10

C. Laws relating to ritual cleanliness chs. 11-15

1. Uncleanness due to contact with certain animals ch. 11

2. Uncleanness due to childbirth ch. 12

3. Uncleanness due to skin and covering abnormalities chs. 13-14

4. Uncleanness due to bodily discharges associated with reproduction ch. 15

D. The Day of Atonement ch. 16

1. Introductory information 16:1-10

2. Instructions concerning the ritual 16:11-28

3. Instructions concerning the duty of the people 16:29-34

II. The private worship of the Israelites chs. 17-27

A. Holiness of conduct on the Israelites' part chs. 17-20

1. Holiness of food ch. 17

2. Holiness of the marriage relationship ch. 18

3. Holiness of behavior toward God and man ch. 19

4. Punishments for serious crimes ch. 20

B. Holiness of the priests, gifts, and sacrifices chs. 21-22

1. The first list of regulations for priests 21:1-15

2. The second list of regulations for priests 21:16-24

3. The third list of regulations for priests ch. 22

C. Sanctification of the Sabbath and the feasts of Yahweh ch. 23

1. The Sabbath 23:1-3

2. The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread 23:4-8

3. The Feast of Firstfruits 23:9-14

4. The Feast of Pentecost 23:15-22

5. The Feast of Trumpets 23:23-25

6. The Day of Atonement 23:26-32

7. The Feast of Tabernacles 23:33-44

D. The preparation of the holy lamps and showbread 24:1-9

E. The punishment of a blasphemer 24:10-23

F. Sanctification of the possession of land by the sabbatical and jubilee years ch. 25

1. The sabbatical year 25:1-7

2. The year of jubilee 25:8-55

G. Promises and warnings ch. 26

1. Introduction to the final conditions of the covenant 26:1-2

2. The blessing for fidelity to the law 26:3-13

3. The warning for contempt of the law 26:14-33

4. The objective of God's judgments in relation to the land and nation of Israel 26:34-46

H. Directions concerning vows ch. 27

1. Vows concerning persons 27:1-8

2. Vows concerning animals 27:9-13

3. Vows concerning other property 27:14-29

4. The redemption of tithes 27:30-34

Constable: Leviticus

Leviticus

Bibliography

Aharoni, Yohanan, and Michael Avi-Yonah. The Macmillan Bible Atlas. Revised ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1977.

Albright, William Foxwell, The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed. Pelican Archaeology series. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1956.

Archer, Gleason L., Jr. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Revised ed. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Bacchiocchi, Samuele. "Sabbatical Typologies of Messianic Redemption." Journal for the Study of Judaism 17:2 (December 1986):153-76.

Baillie, Rebecca A., and E. Eugene Baillie. "Biblical Leprosy as Compared to Present-Day Leprosy." Christian Medical Society Journal 14:3 (Fall 1983):27-29.

Baker, David W. "Division Markers and the Structure of Leviticus 1-7." In Studia Biblica 1978: I, pp. 9-15. Edited by E. Livingstone. Sheffield, England: Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 1979.

Bare, G. Plants and Animals of the Bible. N.c.: United Bible Societies, 1969.

Blosser, Don. "The Sabbath Year Cycle in Josephus." Hebrew Union College Annual 52 (1981):129-39.

Bonar, Andrew A. A Commentary on Leviticus. 5th ed. Geneva Series Commentary series. London: Banner of Truth Trust; reprint ed., 1966.

Bowen, Otis R. "Safer Behavior against AIDS Reiterated for Minorities." American Medical News, December 11, 1987, p. 59.

Browne, S. G. Leprosy in the Bible. London: Christian Medical Fellowship, 1970.

Bush, George. Notes, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Leviticus. New York: Newman and Ivison, 1852; reprint ed. Minneapolis: James & Klock Publishing Co., 1976.

Cansdale, G. S. Animals of the Bible. Exeter, England: Paternoster Press, 1970.

Cardona, Dwardu. "The Rites of Molech." Kronos 9:3 (Summer 1984):20-39.

Carmichael, Calum M. "Forbidden Mixtures." Vetus Testamentum 32:4 (1982):394-415.

Chan, Kim-Kwong. "You Shall Not Eat These Abominable Things: An Examination Of Different Interpretations On Deuteronomy 14:3-20." East Asia Journal of Theology 3:1 (1985):88-106.

Chiu, Andrew. "Is There Ancestor Worship in the Old Testament?" Evangelical Review of Theology 8:2 (October 1984):217-24.

Clements, Ronald E. "Leviticus." In The Broadman Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1969-72.

Cole, Sherwood A. "Biology, Homosexuality, and Moral Culpability." Bibliotheca Sacra 154:615 (July-September 1997):355-66.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. Revised ed. 5 vols. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Davies, D. J. "An Interpretation of Sacrifice in Leviticus." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 89 (1977):387-99.

de Vaux, Roland. Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. 2 vols. Translated by John McHugh. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co., 1961.

Douglas, Mary. Purity and Danger. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966.

Dressler, Herold H. P. "The Sabbath in the Old Testament." In From Sabbath to Lord's Day, pp. 21-41. Edited by D. A. Carson. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982.

Eichrodt, Walther. Theology of the Old Testament. Old Testament Library series. 2 vols. Translated by J. A Baker. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1961.

Fawver, Jay D. and R. Larry Overstreet. "Moses and Preventive Medicine." Bibliotheca Sacra 147:587 (July-September 1990):270-85.

Fee, Gordon D., and Douglas Stuart. How to Read the Bible for All It's Worth. Second ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Feinberg, Charles Lee. "Hanakkah." Fundamentalist Journal 5:1 (December 1986):16-18.

Friedland, Eric L. "The Atonement Memorial Service in the American Mahzor." Hebrew Union College Annual 55 (1984):243-82.

Gerstenberger, E. S. Leviticus. Old Testament Library series. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1993.

Gnuse, Robert. "Jubilee Legislation in Leviticus: Israel's Vision of Social Reform." Biblical Theology Bulletin 15:2 (April 1985):43-48.

Goldberg, Michael. "Expository Articles: Exodus 1:13-14." Interpretation 37:4 (October 1983):389-91.

Gowan, Donald E. "Wealth and Poverty in the Old Testament." Interpretation 41:4 (October 1987):341-53.

Grabbe, Lester L. "The Scapegoat Tradition: A Study in Early Jewish Interpretation." Journal for the Study of Judaism 18:2 (December 1987):152-67.

Harris, R. Laird. "Leviticus." In Genesis--Numbers. Vol. 2 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and Richard P. Polcyn. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1990.

Harrison, R. K. Leviticus. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries series. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1980.

Hartley, J. E. Leviticus. Word Biblical Commentary series. Dallas: Word Publishers, 1992.

Hays, J. Daniel. "Applying the Old Testament Law Today." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:629 (January-March 2001):21-35.

Hertz, J. H. Leviticus. London: Oxford University Press, 1932.

Hoffner, Harry A. "Incest, Sodomy and Bestiality in the Ancient Near East." In Orient and Occident. Essays Presented to Cyrus H. Gordon on the Occasion of His Sixty-fifth Birthday, pp. 81-90. Edited by H. A. Hoffner. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1973.

Horton, Fred L., Jr. "Form and Structure in Laws Relating to Women: Leviticus 18:6-18." In Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers, pp. 20-33. Edited by George W. MacRae. Cambridge, Mass.: Scholars Press, 1973.

Hui, Timothy K. "The Purpose of Israel's Annual Feasts." Bibliotheca Sacra 147:586 (April-June 1990):143-54.

Hulbert, Terry C. "The Eschatological Significance of Israel's Annual Feasts." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1965.

Hulse, E. V. "The Nature of Biblical Leprosy' and the Use of Alternative Medical Terms in Modern Translations of the Bible." Palestine Exploration Quarterly 107 (1975):87-105.

Johnson, James R. "Toward a Biblical Approach to Masturbation." Journal of Psychology and Theology 10:2 (Summer 1982):137-46.

Johnson, Luke T. "The Use of Leviticus 19 in the Letter of James." Journal of Biblical Literature 101:3 (1982):391-401.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, l866.

Judisch, Douglas McC. L. "Propitiation in the Language and Typology of the Old Testament." Concordia Theological Quarterly 48:2-3 (April-July 1984):121-43.

Jukes, Andrew. The Law of the Offerings. 17th ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1966.

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. "Leviticus." In The Interpreter's Bible. Nashville: Abingdon, 1994.

_____. Toward Old Testament Ethics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1983.

Keil, C. F. Manual of Biblical Archaeology. 2 vols. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1887-88.

Keil, C. F., and Franz Delitzsch. The Pentateuch. 3 vols. Translated by James Martin. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. N.p.; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Kellogg, Samuel H. The Book of Leviticus. The Expositors' Bible series. New York: George H. Doran Co., n.d.

King, Marchant A. "Pentecost and the Fall Feasts." Moody Monthly 85:10 (June 1985):55-58.

_____. "The Sabbath and the Spring Feasts." Moody Monthly 85:9 (May 1985):46-48.

Kitchen, Kenneth A. Ancient Orient and Old Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1966.

_____. The Bible In Its World: The Bible and Archaeology Today. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1977.

_____. "The Old Testament in its Context: 2 From Egypt to the Jordan." Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin 60 (1971):3-11.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, 12 vols. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 1: Genesis-Leviticus, by John Peter Lange and Frederic Gardiner. Translated by Tayler Lewis, A. Gosman, and Charles M. Mead.

Leach, E. R. Culture and Communication. Cambridge: University Press, 1976

Levine, B. A. In the Presence of the Lord. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1974.

Lemche, N. P. "The Manumission of Slaves - The Fallow Year - The Sabbatical Year - The Jobel Year." Vetus Testamentum 26 (January 1976):38-59.

Lindsey, F. Duane. "Leviticus." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 163-214. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

Livingston, Dennis H. "The Crime of Leviticus XXIV 11." Vetus Testamentum 36:3 (July 1986):352-53.

Livingston, G. Herbert. The Pentateuch in Its Cultural Environment. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Macht, D. I. "A Scientific Appreciation of Leviticus 12:1-5." Journal of Biblical Literature 52 (1933):253-60.

Magonet, Jonathan. "The Structure and Meaning of Leviticus 19." Hebrew Annual Review 7 (1983):151-67.

Margotta, R. The Story of Medicine. New York: Golden Press, 1967.

Master, John R. "The Place of Chapter 24 in the Structure of the Book of Leviticus." Bibliotheca Sacra 159:636 (October-December 2002):415-24.

Mathews, Kenneth A. Genesis 1-11:26. New American Commentary series. N.c.: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996.

Mendelsohn, I. Slavery in the Ancient Near East. New York: Oxford University Press, 1949.

McMillen, Sim I. None of These Diseases. Westwood, N.J.: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1963.

Merrill, Eugene H. "A Theology of the Pentateuch." In A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 7-87. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Milgrom, Jacob. "The Biblical Diet Laws as an Ethical System." Interpretation 17 (1963):288-301.

_____. "The Compass of Biblical Sancta." Jewish Quarterly Review 65 (April 1975):205-16.

_____. Cult and Conscience: The "Asham" and the Priestly Doctrine of Repentance. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1976.

_____. "The Graduated Hatta't [Sin Offering] of Leviticus 5:1-13." Journal of the American Oriental Society 103:1 (January-March 1983):249-54.

_____. Leviticus 1-16. Anchor Bible series. New York: Doubleday, 1991.

_____. "The Priestly Doctrine of Repentance." Revue Biblique 82 (April 1975):186-205.

_____. "Two Kinds of Hatta't [Sin Offering]." Vetus Testamentum 26 (1976):333-37.

Mitchell, Bill. "Leviticus 24.6: The Bread of the Presence--Rows or Piles?" Bible Translator 33:4 (October 1982):447-48.

Mitchell, Mike. "The Go'el: Kinsman Redeemer." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):13-15.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morganstern, Julian. "The Decalogue of the Holiness Code." Hebrew Union College Annual 26 (1955):1-27.

Murray, John. Principles of Conduct. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1957.

Neufeld, Edward. "The Prohibitions Against Loans at Interest in Ancient Hebrew Laws." Hebrew Union College Annual 26 (1955):355-412.

The New Bible Dictionary, 1962 ed. S.v. "Clean and Unclean," by Charles L. Feinberg.

Noordtzij, A. Leviticus. Translated by Raymond Togtman. Bible Student's Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982.

North, Robert. Sociology of the Biblical Jubilee. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1954.

Noth, Martin. The Laws in the Pentateuch and Other Studies. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1966.

_____. Leviticus: A Commentary. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1977.

Penner, Clifford L. "A Reaction to Johnson's Biblical Approach to Masturbation." Journal of Psychology and Theology 10:2 (Summer 1982):147-49.

Peter, Rene. "L'Imposition des Mains dans L'Ancien Testament." Vetus Testamentum 27:1 (1977):48-55.

Philip, James. Numbers. The Communicator's Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1987.

Porter, J. R. Leviticus. Cambridge Bible Commentary series. Cambridge: University Press, 1976.

Rainey, A. F. "The Order of Sacrifices in OT Ritual Texts." Biblica 51 (1970):485-98.

Richard, Ramesh P. "Soteriological Inclusivism and Dispensationalism." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):85-108.

Riggans, Walter. Numbers. Daily Bible Study series. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1983.

Rooker, Mark F. Leviticus. The New American Commentary series. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000.

Rosner, Brian. "The Ritual of the Peace Offering: Leviticus 7:11-21." Exegesis and Exposition 2:1 (Summer 1987):83-94.

Ryrie, Charles C. Dispensationalism. Chicago: Moody Press, 1995.

_____. Dispensationalism Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

Sailhamer, John H. The Pentateuch as Narrative. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Sansom, M. C. "Laying on of Hands in the Old Testament." Expository Times 94:11 (August 1983):323-26.

Schultz, Samuel J. Leviticus: God Among His People. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1983.

Schwantes, Siegfried J. A Short History of the Ancient Near East. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965.

Snaith, Norman. "The Cult of Molech." Vetus Testamentum 16 (1966):123-24.

Speiser, E. A. Oriental and Biblical Studies. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1967.

Sprinkle, Joe M. "Old Testament Perspectives on Divorce and Remarriage." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:4 (December 1997):529-50.

_____. "The Rationale of the Laws of Clean and Unclean in the Old Testament." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:4 (December 2000):637-57.

Stager, Lawrence E., and Samuel R Wolff. "Child Sacrifice at Carthage--Religious Rite or Population Control?" Biblical Archaeology Review 10:1 (January-February 1984):31-51.

Tosato, Angelo. "The Law of Leviticus 18:18: A Reexamination." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 46 (1984):199-214.

Vermes, Geza. "Leviticus 18:21 in Ancient Jewish Bible Exegesis." In Studies in Aggadah, Targum and Jewish Liturgy in Memory of Joseph Heinemann, pp. 108-124. Edited by Jakob J. Petuchowski and Ezra Fleischer. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1981.

Waltke, Bruce K. "Cain and His Offering." Westminster Theological Journal 48:2 (Fall 1986):363-72.

Walvoord, John F. The Holy Spirit. Findlay, Ohio: Dunham Publishing Co., 1958.

Wenham, Gordon J. The Book of Leviticus. New International Commentary on the Old Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1979.

_____. Numbers. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries series. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1981.

_____. "Why Does Sexual Intercourse Defile (Lev 15:18)?" Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 95:3 (1983):432-34.

West, J. Introduction to the Old Testament. New York: Macmillan, 1952.

Whybray, R. Norman. Introduction to the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995.

Wiersbe, Warren W. Be Holy. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1979.

Wilkinson, John. "Leprosy and Leviticus: The Problem of Description and Identification." Scottish Journal of Theology 30 (1984):153-69.

Wood, Leon. A Survey of Israel's History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970.

Wright, Christopher J. H. "What Happened Every Seven Years in Israel?" Evangelical Quarterly 56:3 (July 1984):129-38; 56:4 (October 1984):193-201.

Wright, David P. "The Gesture of Hand Placement in the Hebrew Bible and in Hittite Literature." Journal of the American Oriental Society 106:3 (July-September 1986):433-46.

_____. "Observations on the Ethical Foundations of the Biblical Dietary Laws: A Response to Jacob Milgrom." In Religion and Law: Biblical-Judaic and Islamic Perspectives, pp. 193-98. Edited by Edwin B. Firmage, Bernard G. Weiss, and John W. Welch. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990.

Zimmerli, Walther. I Am Yahweh. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1982.

Zohar, Noam. "Repentance and Purification: The Significance and Semantics of ht't in the Pentateuch." Journal of Biblical Studies 107:4 (1988):609-18.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Leviticus (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION.

The Book is called Leviticus : because it treats of the offices, ministries, rites and ceremonies of the Priests and Levites. The Hebrews call it Vayyicra , from the word with which it begins; (Challoner) "and (the Lord) called." The a at the end of this word is printed in a smaller size, to insinuate that little children should begin to read this Book first, if we may give any credit to those who attempt to account for all the irregularities sanctioned by the great Massora! But such irregular letters are the faults of some transcribers, and are of no authority. (Kennicott, Dis. 1.) --- This Book is styled also, "The Priests' Law." (Haydock) --- The seven first chapters explain the sacrifices; the sixteen next, the offices and ordination of the Priests and Levites. From the 23d chapter to the end, the feasts are designated, and some regulations respecting vows are interspersed. All these rites and sacrifices foreshewed the eucharistic sacrifice of Jesus Christ, (St. Leo, ser. 8. de pas. Trid. sef. 22. c. 1.) and tended to keep the Hebrews employed, and at a greater distance from idolatry. (St. Jerome on Isai. i. &c.) --- These prescriptions were given during the month of Nisan, in the second year after the exit, while the Hebrews remained at the foot of Mount Sinai. God spoke from the New Tabernacle. (Tirinus) --- In the Book of Deuteronomy we find but few regulations respecting sacrifices, as Moses had sufficiently explained them in this book. (Du Hamel) --- If we confine ourselves to the letter, we may say these precepts are not good, and carnal; (Ezechiel xx. 25.; Hebrews vii. 16.) but if we consider the spirit, we shall confess that they are excellent, and spiritual. (Romans vii. 14.; 2 Corinthians iii. 6.; Origen, contra Cels. vii.) (Calmet)

Gill: Leviticus (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO LEVITICUS

This book is commonly called by the Jews Vajikra, from the first word with which it begins, and sometimes תורת כהנים, "the law of the priests" ^a; and this is its name in the Syriac and Arabic versions: by the Septuagint interpreters it is called λευιτικον, and by the Latins, Leviticus, or the Levitical book, because it gives an account of the Levitical priesthood, as the apostle calls it, Heb 7:11. It treats of the sacrifices under the Levitical dispensation, and of the priests concerned in them, and of the times and seasons in which they were offered, and of many other rites and ceremonies. That it was wrote by Moses is not only generally believed by the Jews, but is affirmed in the New Testament; see Mat 8:4 compared with Lev 14:2 from whence, as well as from other citations out of it in other places, the authority of it may be concluded. The matter of it was delivered to Moses, and very likely by him then written upon the erection of the tabernacle, which was in the second year of the Israelites coming out of Egypt, in the first month, and the first day of the month, Exo 40:17 and it was on the same day that the Lord spake to Moses out of it, and delivered to him the laws concerning sacrifices, recorded in the first seven chapters; see Num 1:1 compared with Lev 1:1 and on the eighth day of the same month, and some following days, the remainder of it was given to him, and written by him, see Lev 8:1 to which agrees the Targum of Jonathan on Lev 1:1.

"when Moses had made an end of erecting the tabernacle, Moses thought and reasoned in his heart, and said, Mount Sinai, its excellency was the excellency of an hour, and its holiness the holiness of three days, it was not possible for me to ascend unto it, until the time that the Word was speaking with me; but this tabernacle of the congregation, its excellency is an excellency for ever, and its holiness an holiness for ever, it is fit that I should not enter into it, until the time that be speaks with me from before the Lord; and therefore the Word of the Lord called to Moses, and the Word of the Lord spake with him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying;''

and to the same purpose the Jerusalem Targum. It was written in the year from the creation of the world 2514, and about 1490 years before the coming of Christ. The various sacrifices, rites, and ceremonies made mention of in it, were typical of Christ, and shadows of good things to come by him: there are many things in it, which give great light to several passages in the New Testament, and it is worthy of diligent reading and consideration.

Gill: Leviticus 16 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO LEVITICUS 16

This chapter treats of the day of atonement, and of the rites, sacrifices, and services of it, directs when Aaron should come into the holy of holies, Lev 16:1; and in what habit he should then appear, and with what offerings both for himself, and for the people, Lev 16:3; and that having slain his own sin offering, and that for the people, he should offer incense before the mercy seat, and sprinkle that with the blood of both, Lev 16:11; and by these offerings make atonement for the holy place, the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar, Lev 16:16; and having done this, he was to take the live goat, lay his hands on it, confess over it, and put upon it all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and then send it away by a fit man into the wilderness, Lev 16:20; upon which he was to put off his linen garments, wash his flesh, and put them on again, and offer the burnt offering for himself, and for the people, Lev 16:23; also he that let go the goat, and he that carried and burnt the sin offerings without the camp, were to wash themselves and clothes also, Lev 16:26; the observance of this day, once a year, which was on the tenth of the seventh month, as a day of affliction and atonement, was to be a statute for ever to the children of Israel, Lev 16:29.