Leviticus 1:11

1:11 and must slaughter it on the north side of the altar before the Lord, and the sons of Aaron, the priests, will splash its blood against the altar’s sides.

Leviticus 6:17

6:17 It must not be baked with yeast. ¹  I have given it as their portion from my gifts. It is most holy, ²  like the sin offering and the guilt offering.

Leviticus 7:12

7:12 If he presents it on account of thanksgiving, ³  along with the thank offering sacrifice he must present unleavened loaves mixed with olive oil, unleavened wafers smeared with olive oil, ⁴  and well soaked ⁵  ring-shaped loaves made of choice wheat flour ⁶  mixed with olive oil.

Leviticus 10:12

Perpetual Statutes Moses spoke to Aaron

10:12 Then Moses spoke to Aaron and to Eleazar and Ithamar, his remaining sons, “Take the grain offering which remains from the gifts of the Lord and eat it unleavened beside the altar, for it is most holy.

Exodus 12:8

12:8 They will eat the meat the same night; ⁷  they will eat it roasted over the fire with bread made without yeast ⁸  and with bitter herbs.

Exodus 12:1

The Institution of the Passover

12:1 ⁹ The Lord said ¹⁰  to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt, ¹¹ 

Colossians 1:7-8

1:7 You learned the gospel ¹²  from Epaphras, our dear fellow slave ¹³  – a ¹⁴  faithful minister of Christ on our ¹⁵  behalf – 1:8 who also told us of your love in the Spirit.

Hebrews 7:26

7:26 For it is indeed fitting for us to have such a high priest: holy, innocent, undefiled, separate from sinners, and exalted above the heavens.

Hebrews 7:1

The Nature of Melchizedek’s Priesthood

7:1 Now this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, met Abraham as he was returning from defeating the kings and blessed him. ¹⁶ 

Hebrews 2:1

Warning Against Drifting Away

2:1 Therefore we must pay closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away.

Hebrews 2:1

Warning Against Drifting Away

2:1 Therefore we must pay closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away.

[6:17]  ¹ tn Heb “It must not be baked leavened” (cf. Lev 2:11). The noun “leaven” is traditional in English versions (cf. KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV), but “yeast” is more commonly used today.

[6:17]  ² tn Heb “holiness of holinesses [or holy of holies] it is”; cf. NAB “most sacred.”

[7:12]  ³ tn Or “for a thank offering.”

[7:12]  ⁴ tn See the notes on Lev 2:4.

[7:12]  ⁵ tn See the note on Lev 6:21 [6:14 HT].

[7:12]  ⁶ tn Heb “choice wheat flour well soaked ring-shaped loaves.” See the note on Lev 2:1.

[12:8]  ⁷ tn Heb “this night.”

[12:8]  ⁸ sn Bread made without yeast could be baked quickly, not requiring time for the use of a leavening ingredient to make the dough rise. In Deut 16:3 the unleavened cakes are called “the bread of affliction,” which alludes to the alarm and haste of the Israelites. In later Judaism and in the writings of Paul, leaven came to be a symbol of evil or corruption, and so “unleavened bread” – bread made without yeast – was interpreted to be a picture of purity or freedom from corruption or defilement (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 90-91).

[12:1]  ⁹ sn Chapter 12 details the culmination of the ten plagues on Egypt and the beginning of the actual deliverance from bondage. Moreover, the celebration of this festival of Passover was to become a central part of the holy calendar of Israel. The contents of this chapter have significance for NT studies as well, since the Passover was a type of the death of Jesus. The structure of this section before the crossing of the sea is as follows: the institution of the Passover (12:1-28), the night of farewell and departure (12:29-42), slaves and strangers (12:43-51), and the laws of the firstborn (13:1-16). In this immediate section there is the institution of the Passover itself (12:1-13), then the Unleavened Bread (12:14-20), and then the report of the response of the people (12:21-28).

[12:1]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “and Yahweh said.”

[12:1]  ¹¹ tn Heb “saying.”

[1:7]  ¹² tn Or “learned it.” The Greek text simply has “you learned” without the reference to “the gospel,” but “the gospel” is supplied to clarify the sense of the clause. Direct objects were frequently omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[1:7]  ¹³ tn The Greek word translated “fellow slave” is σύνδουλος (sundoulo"); the σύν- prefix here denotes association. Though δοῦλος is normally translated “servant,” the word does not bear the connotation of a free individual serving another. BDAG notes that “‘servant’ for ‘slave’ is largely confined to Biblical transl. and early American times…in normal usage at the present time the two words are carefully distinguished” (BDAG 260 s.v.). The most accurate translation is “bondservant” (sometimes found in the ASV for δοῦλος), in that it often indicates one who sells himself into slavery to another. But as this is archaic, few today understand its force.

[1:7]  ¹⁴ tn The Greek text has “who (ὅς, Jos) is a faithful minister.” The above translation conveys the antecedent of the relative pronoun quite well and avoids the redundancy with the following substantival participle of v. 8, namely, “who told” (ὁ δηλώσας, Jo dhlwsa").

[1:7]  ¹⁵ tc ‡ Judging by the superior witnesses for the first person pronoun ἡμῶν (Jhmwn, “us”; Ì⁴⁶ א* A B D* F G 326* 1505 al) vs. the second person pronoun ὑμῶν (Jumwn, “you”; found in א² C D¹ Ψ 075 33 1739 1881 Ï lat sy co), ἡμῶν should be regarded as original. Although it is possible that ἡμῶν was an early alteration of ὑμῶν (either unintentionally, as dittography, since it comes seventeen letters after the previous ἡμῶν; or intentionally, to conform to the surrounding first person pronouns), this supposition is difficult to maintain in light of the varied and valuable witnesses for this reading. Further, the second person is both embedded in the verb ἐμάθετε (emaqete) and is explicit in v. 8 (ὑμῶν). Hence, the motivation to change to the first person pronoun is counterbalanced by such evidence. The second person pronoun may have been introduced unintentionally via homoioarcton with the ὑπέρ (Juper) that immediately precedes it. As well, the second person reading is somewhat harder for it seems to address Epaphras’ role only in relation to Paul and his colleagues, rather than in relation to the Colossians. Nevertheless, the decision must be based ultimately on external evidence (because the internal evidence can be variously interpreted), and this strongly supports ἡμῶν.

[7:1]  ¹⁶ sn A series of quotations from Gen 14:17-19.