Ezekiel 46:20

46:20 He said to me, “This is the place where the priests will boil the guilt offering and the sin offering, and where they will bake the grain offering, so that they do not bring them out to the outer court to transmit holiness to the people.”

Exodus 29:37

29:37 For seven days ¹  you are to make atonement for the altar and set it apart as holy. Then the altar will be most holy. ²  Anything that touches the altar will be holy. ³ 

Exodus 30:29

30:29 So you are to sanctify them, ⁴  and they will be most holy; ⁵  anything that touches them will be holy. ⁶ 

Leviticus 6:27

6:27 Anyone who touches its meat must be holy, and whoever spatters some of its blood on a garment, ⁷  you must wash ⁸  whatever he spatters it on in a holy place.

Matthew 23:17-19

23:17 Blind fools! Which is greater, the gold or the temple that makes the gold sacred? 23:18 And, ‘Whoever swears by the altar is bound by nothing. ⁹  But if anyone swears by the gift on it he is bound by the oath.’ 23:19 You are blind! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred?

Matthew 23:1

Seven Woes

23:1 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples,

Colossians 3:5-6

3:5 So put to death whatever in your nature belongs to the earth: ¹⁰  sexual immorality, impurity, shameful passion, ¹¹  evil desire, and greed which is idolatry. 3:6 Because of these things the wrath of God is coming on the sons of disobedience. ¹² 

¹ tn Once again this is an adverbial accusative of time. Each day for seven days the ritual at the altar is to be followed.

² tn The construction is the superlative genitive: “holy of holies,” or “most holy.”

³ sn This line states an unusual principle, meant to preserve the sanctity of the altar. S. R. Driver explains it this way (Exodus, 325): If anything comes in contact with the altar, it becomes holy and must remain in the sanctuary for Yahweh’s use. If a person touches the altar, he likewise becomes holy and cannot return to the profane regions. He will be given over to God to be dealt with as God pleases. Anyone who was not qualified to touch the altar did not dare approach it, for contact would have meant that he was no longer free to leave but was God’s holy possession – and might pay for it with his life (see Exod 30:29; Lev 6:18b, 27; and Ezek 46:20).

⁴ tn The verb is a Piel perfect with vav (ו) consecutive; in this verse it is summarizing or explaining what the anointing has accomplished. This is the effect of the anointing (see Exod 29:36).

⁵ tn This is the superlative genitive again, Heb “holy of holies.”

⁶ tn See Exod 29:37; as before, this could refer to anything or anyone touching the sanctified items.

⁷ tn Heb “on the garment”; NCV “on any clothes”; CEV “on the clothes of the priest.”

⁸ tc The translation “you must wash” is based on the MT as it stands (cf. NASB, NIV). Smr, LXX, Syriac, Tg. Ps.-J., and the Vulgate have a third person masculine singular passive form (Pual), “[the garment] must be washed” (cf. NAB, NRSV, NLT). This could also be supported from the verbs in the following verse, and it requires only a repointing of the Hebrew text with no change in consonants. See the remarks in J. E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC), 90 and J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:404.

⁹ tn Grk “Whoever swears by the altar, it is nothing.”

¹⁰ tn Grk “the members which are on the earth.” See BDAG 628 s.v. μέλος 1, “put to death whatever in you is worldly.”

¹¹ tn Or “lust.”

¹² tc The words ἐπὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς τῆς ἀπειθείας (epi tou" Juiou" th" apeiqeia", “on the sons of disobedience”) are lacking in Ì⁴⁶ B b sa, but are found in א A C D F G H I Ψ 075 0278 33 1739 1881 Ï lat sy bo. The words are omitted by several English translations (NASB, NIV, ESV, TNIV). This textual problem is quite difficult to resolve. On the one hand, the parallel account in Eph 5:6 has these words, thus providing scribes a motive for adding them here. On the other hand, the reading without the words may be too hard: The ἐν οἷς (en |oi") of v. 7 seems to have no antecedent without υἱούς already in the text, although it could possibly be construed as neuter referring to the vice list in v. 5. Further, although the witness of B is especially important, there are other places in which B and Ì⁴⁶ share errant readings of omission. Nevertheless, the strength of the internal evidence against the longer reading is at least sufficient to cause doubt here. The decision to retain the words in the text is less than certain.