Blood, Life, Sacrifice, and the Lord's Exclusive Altar

Lev 17:1-2 The directions are given to “Aaron and his sons, and all the children of Israel,” because they were not only binding upon the nation generally, but upon the priesthood also; whereas the instructions in ch. 18-20 are addressed to “the children of Israel,” or “the whole congregation” (Lev 18:2; Lev 19:2; Lev 20:2), just as special laws are laid down for the priests in ch. 20 and 21 with reference to the circumstances mentioned there.

Lev 17:1-2 The directions are given to “Aaron and his sons, and all the children of Israel,” because they were not only binding upon the nation generally, but upon the priesthood also; whereas the instructions in ch. 18-20 are addressed to “the children of Israel,” or “the whole congregation” (Lev 18:2; Lev 19:2; Lev 20:2), just as special laws are laid down for the priests in ch. 20 and 21 with reference to the circumstances mentioned there.

Lev 17:3-7 Whoever of the house of Israel slaughtered an ox, sheep, or goat, either within or outside the camp, without bringing the animal to the tabernacle, to offer a sacrifice therefrom to the Lord, “ blood was to be reckoned to him; ” that is to say, as the following expression, “he hath shed blood,” shows, such slaughtering was to be reckoned as the shedding of blood, or blood-guiltiness, and punished with extermination (see Gen 17:14). The severity of this prohibition required some explanation, and this is given in the reason assigned in Lev 17:5-7, viz.

, “that the Israelites may bring their slain-offerings, which they slay in the open field, before the door of the tabernacle, as peace-offerings to Jehovah,” and “no more offer their sacrifices to the שׂעירים, after whom they go a whoring” (Lev 17:7). This reason presupposes that the custom of dedicating the slain animals as sacrifices to some deity, to which a portion of them was offered, was then widely spread among the Israelites.

It had probably been adopted from the Egyptians; though this is not expressly stated by ancient writers: Herodotus (i. 132) and Strabo (xv. 732) simply mentioning it as a Persian custom, whilst the law book of Manu ascribes it to the Indians. To root out this idolatrous custom from among the Israelites, they were commanded to slay every animal before the tabernacle, as a sacrificial gift to Jehovah, and to bring the slain-offerings, which they would have slain in the open field, to the priest at the tabernacle, as shelamim (praise-offerings and thank-offerings), that he might sprinkle the blood upon the altar, and burn the fat as a sweet-smelling savour for Jehovah (see Lev 3:2-5).

“ The face of the field ” (Lev 17:5, as in Lev 14:7, Lev 14:53): the open field, in distinction from the enclosed space of the court of Jehovah’s dwelling. “The altar of Jehovah” is spoken of in Lev 17:6 instead of “ the altar ” only (Lev 1:5; Lev 11:15, etc.) , on account of the contrast drawn between it and the altars upon which they offered sacrifice to Seirim .

שׂעירים, literally goats, is here used to signify daemones ( Vulg .) , “field-devils” ( Luther ), demons, like the שׂדים in Deu 32:17, who were supposed to inhabit the desert (Isa 13:21; Isa 34:14), and whose pernicious influence they sought to avert by sacrifices. The Israelites had brought this superstition, and the idolatry to which it gave rise, from Egypt.

The Seirim were the gods whom the Israelites worshipped and went a whoring after in Egypt (Jos 24:14; Eze 20:7; Eze 23:3, Eze 23:8, Eze 23:19, Eze 23:21, Eze 23:27). Both the thing and the name were derived from the Egyptians, who worshipped goats as gods (Josephus c. Ap . 2, 7), particularly Pan , who was represented in the form of a goat, a personification of the male and fertilizing principle in nature, whom they called Mendes and reckoned among the eight leading gods, and to whom they had built a splendid and celebrated temple in Thmuis , the capital of the Mendesian Nomos in Lower Egypt, and erected statues in the temples in all directions (cf.

Herod . 2, 42, 46; Strabo , xvii. 802; Diod. Sic. i. 18). The expression “a statute for ever” refers to the principle of the law, that sacrifices were to be offered to Jehovah alone, and not to the law that every animal was to be slain before the tabernacle, which was afterwards repealed by Moses, when they were about to enter Canaan, where it could no longer be carried out (Deu 12:15).

Lev 17:3-7 Whoever of the house of Israel slaughtered an ox, sheep, or goat, either within or outside the camp, without bringing the animal to the tabernacle, to offer a sacrifice therefrom to the Lord, “ blood was to be reckoned to him; ” that is to say, as the following expression, “he hath shed blood,” shows, such slaughtering was to be reckoned as the shedding of blood, or blood-guiltiness, and punished with extermination (see Gen 17:14). The severity of this prohibition required some explanation, and this is given in the reason assigned in Lev 17:5-7, viz.

, “that the Israelites may bring their slain-offerings, which they slay in the open field, before the door of the tabernacle, as peace-offerings to Jehovah,” and “no more offer their sacrifices to the שׂעירים, after whom they go a whoring” (Lev 17:7). This reason presupposes that the custom of dedicating the slain animals as sacrifices to some deity, to which a portion of them was offered, was then widely spread among the Israelites.

It had probably been adopted from the Egyptians; though this is not expressly stated by ancient writers: Herodotus (i. 132) and Strabo (xv. 732) simply mentioning it as a Persian custom, whilst the law book of Manu ascribes it to the Indians. To root out this idolatrous custom from among the Israelites, they were commanded to slay every animal before the tabernacle, as a sacrificial gift to Jehovah, and to bring the slain-offerings, which they would have slain in the open field, to the priest at the tabernacle, as shelamim (praise-offerings and thank-offerings), that he might sprinkle the blood upon the altar, and burn the fat as a sweet-smelling savour for Jehovah (see Lev 3:2-5).

“ The face of the field ” (Lev 17:5, as in Lev 14:7, Lev 14:53): the open field, in distinction from the enclosed space of the court of Jehovah’s dwelling. “The altar of Jehovah” is spoken of in Lev 17:6 instead of “ the altar ” only (Lev 1:5; Lev 11:15, etc.) , on account of the contrast drawn between it and the altars upon which they offered sacrifice to Seirim .

שׂעירים, literally goats, is here used to signify daemones ( Vulg .) , “field-devils” ( Luther ), demons, like the שׂדים in Deu 32:17, who were supposed to inhabit the desert (Isa 13:21; Isa 34:14), and whose pernicious influence they sought to avert by sacrifices. The Israelites had brought this superstition, and the idolatry to which it gave rise, from Egypt.

The Seirim were the gods whom the Israelites worshipped and went a whoring after in Egypt (Jos 24:14; Eze 20:7; Eze 23:3, Eze 23:8, Eze 23:19, Eze 23:21, Eze 23:27). Both the thing and the name were derived from the Egyptians, who worshipped goats as gods (Josephus c. Ap . 2, 7), particularly Pan , who was represented in the form of a goat, a personification of the male and fertilizing principle in nature, whom they called Mendes and reckoned among the eight leading gods, and to whom they had built a splendid and celebrated temple in Thmuis , the capital of the Mendesian Nomos in Lower Egypt, and erected statues in the temples in all directions (cf.

Herod . 2, 42, 46; Strabo , xvii. 802; Diod. Sic. i. 18). The expression “a statute for ever” refers to the principle of the law, that sacrifices were to be offered to Jehovah alone, and not to the law that every animal was to be slain before the tabernacle, which was afterwards repealed by Moses, when they were about to enter Canaan, where it could no longer be carried out (Deu 12:15).

Lev 17:3-7 Whoever of the house of Israel slaughtered an ox, sheep, or goat, either within or outside the camp, without bringing the animal to the tabernacle, to offer a sacrifice therefrom to the Lord, “ blood was to be reckoned to him; ” that is to say, as the following expression, “he hath shed blood,” shows, such slaughtering was to be reckoned as the shedding of blood, or blood-guiltiness, and punished with extermination (see Gen 17:14). The severity of this prohibition required some explanation, and this is given in the reason assigned in Lev 17:5-7, viz.

, “that the Israelites may bring their slain-offerings, which they slay in the open field, before the door of the tabernacle, as peace-offerings to Jehovah,” and “no more offer their sacrifices to the שׂעירים, after whom they go a whoring” (Lev 17:7). This reason presupposes that the custom of dedicating the slain animals as sacrifices to some deity, to which a portion of them was offered, was then widely spread among the Israelites.

It had probably been adopted from the Egyptians; though this is not expressly stated by ancient writers: Herodotus (i. 132) and Strabo (xv. 732) simply mentioning it as a Persian custom, whilst the law book of Manu ascribes it to the Indians. To root out this idolatrous custom from among the Israelites, they were commanded to slay every animal before the tabernacle, as a sacrificial gift to Jehovah, and to bring the slain-offerings, which they would have slain in the open field, to the priest at the tabernacle, as shelamim (praise-offerings and thank-offerings), that he might sprinkle the blood upon the altar, and burn the fat as a sweet-smelling savour for Jehovah (see Lev 3:2-5).

“ The face of the field ” (Lev 17:5, as in Lev 14:7, Lev 14:53): the open field, in distinction from the enclosed space of the court of Jehovah’s dwelling. “The altar of Jehovah” is spoken of in Lev 17:6 instead of “ the altar ” only (Lev 1:5; Lev 11:15, etc.) , on account of the contrast drawn between it and the altars upon which they offered sacrifice to Seirim .

שׂעירים, literally goats, is here used to signify daemones ( Vulg .) , “field-devils” ( Luther ), demons, like the שׂדים in Deu 32:17, who were supposed to inhabit the desert (Isa 13:21; Isa 34:14), and whose pernicious influence they sought to avert by sacrifices. The Israelites had brought this superstition, and the idolatry to which it gave rise, from Egypt.

The Seirim were the gods whom the Israelites worshipped and went a whoring after in Egypt (Jos 24:14; Eze 20:7; Eze 23:3, Eze 23:8, Eze 23:19, Eze 23:21, Eze 23:27). Both the thing and the name were derived from the Egyptians, who worshipped goats as gods (Josephus c. Ap . 2, 7), particularly Pan , who was represented in the form of a goat, a personification of the male and fertilizing principle in nature, whom they called Mendes and reckoned among the eight leading gods, and to whom they had built a splendid and celebrated temple in Thmuis , the capital of the Mendesian Nomos in Lower Egypt, and erected statues in the temples in all directions (cf.

Herod . 2, 42, 46; Strabo , xvii. 802; Diod. Sic. i. 18). The expression “a statute for ever” refers to the principle of the law, that sacrifices were to be offered to Jehovah alone, and not to the law that every animal was to be slain before the tabernacle, which was afterwards repealed by Moses, when they were about to enter Canaan, where it could no longer be carried out (Deu 12:15).

Lev 17:3-7 Whoever of the house of Israel slaughtered an ox, sheep, or goat, either within or outside the camp, without bringing the animal to the tabernacle, to offer a sacrifice therefrom to the Lord, “ blood was to be reckoned to him; ” that is to say, as the following expression, “he hath shed blood,” shows, such slaughtering was to be reckoned as the shedding of blood, or blood-guiltiness, and punished with extermination (see Gen 17:14). The severity of this prohibition required some explanation, and this is given in the reason assigned in Lev 17:5-7, viz.

, “that the Israelites may bring their slain-offerings, which they slay in the open field, before the door of the tabernacle, as peace-offerings to Jehovah,” and “no more offer their sacrifices to the שׂעירים, after whom they go a whoring” (Lev 17:7). This reason presupposes that the custom of dedicating the slain animals as sacrifices to some deity, to which a portion of them was offered, was then widely spread among the Israelites.

It had probably been adopted from the Egyptians; though this is not expressly stated by ancient writers: Herodotus (i. 132) and Strabo (xv. 732) simply mentioning it as a Persian custom, whilst the law book of Manu ascribes it to the Indians. To root out this idolatrous custom from among the Israelites, they were commanded to slay every animal before the tabernacle, as a sacrificial gift to Jehovah, and to bring the slain-offerings, which they would have slain in the open field, to the priest at the tabernacle, as shelamim (praise-offerings and thank-offerings), that he might sprinkle the blood upon the altar, and burn the fat as a sweet-smelling savour for Jehovah (see Lev 3:2-5).

“ The face of the field ” (Lev 17:5, as in Lev 14:7, Lev 14:53): the open field, in distinction from the enclosed space of the court of Jehovah’s dwelling. “The altar of Jehovah” is spoken of in Lev 17:6 instead of “ the altar ” only (Lev 1:5; Lev 11:15, etc.) , on account of the contrast drawn between it and the altars upon which they offered sacrifice to Seirim .

שׂעירים, literally goats, is here used to signify daemones ( Vulg .) , “field-devils” ( Luther ), demons, like the שׂדים in Deu 32:17, who were supposed to inhabit the desert (Isa 13:21; Isa 34:14), and whose pernicious influence they sought to avert by sacrifices. The Israelites had brought this superstition, and the idolatry to which it gave rise, from Egypt.

The Seirim were the gods whom the Israelites worshipped and went a whoring after in Egypt (Jos 24:14; Eze 20:7; Eze 23:3, Eze 23:8, Eze 23:19, Eze 23:21, Eze 23:27). Both the thing and the name were derived from the Egyptians, who worshipped goats as gods (Josephus c. Ap . 2, 7), particularly Pan , who was represented in the form of a goat, a personification of the male and fertilizing principle in nature, whom they called Mendes and reckoned among the eight leading gods, and to whom they had built a splendid and celebrated temple in Thmuis , the capital of the Mendesian Nomos in Lower Egypt, and erected statues in the temples in all directions (cf.

Herod . 2, 42, 46; Strabo , xvii. 802; Diod. Sic. i. 18). The expression “a statute for ever” refers to the principle of the law, that sacrifices were to be offered to Jehovah alone, and not to the law that every animal was to be slain before the tabernacle, which was afterwards repealed by Moses, when they were about to enter Canaan, where it could no longer be carried out (Deu 12:15).

Lev 17:3-7 Whoever of the house of Israel slaughtered an ox, sheep, or goat, either within or outside the camp, without bringing the animal to the tabernacle, to offer a sacrifice therefrom to the Lord, “ blood was to be reckoned to him; ” that is to say, as the following expression, “he hath shed blood,” shows, such slaughtering was to be reckoned as the shedding of blood, or blood-guiltiness, and punished with extermination (see Gen 17:14). The severity of this prohibition required some explanation, and this is given in the reason assigned in Lev 17:5-7, viz.

, “that the Israelites may bring their slain-offerings, which they slay in the open field, before the door of the tabernacle, as peace-offerings to Jehovah,” and “no more offer their sacrifices to the שׂעירים, after whom they go a whoring” (Lev 17:7). This reason presupposes that the custom of dedicating the slain animals as sacrifices to some deity, to which a portion of them was offered, was then widely spread among the Israelites.

It had probably been adopted from the Egyptians; though this is not expressly stated by ancient writers: Herodotus (i. 132) and Strabo (xv. 732) simply mentioning it as a Persian custom, whilst the law book of Manu ascribes it to the Indians. To root out this idolatrous custom from among the Israelites, they were commanded to slay every animal before the tabernacle, as a sacrificial gift to Jehovah, and to bring the slain-offerings, which they would have slain in the open field, to the priest at the tabernacle, as shelamim (praise-offerings and thank-offerings), that he might sprinkle the blood upon the altar, and burn the fat as a sweet-smelling savour for Jehovah (see Lev 3:2-5).

“ The face of the field ” (Lev 17:5, as in Lev 14:7, Lev 14:53): the open field, in distinction from the enclosed space of the court of Jehovah’s dwelling. “The altar of Jehovah” is spoken of in Lev 17:6 instead of “ the altar ” only (Lev 1:5; Lev 11:15, etc.) , on account of the contrast drawn between it and the altars upon which they offered sacrifice to Seirim .

שׂעירים, literally goats, is here used to signify daemones ( Vulg .) , “field-devils” ( Luther ), demons, like the שׂדים in Deu 32:17, who were supposed to inhabit the desert (Isa 13:21; Isa 34:14), and whose pernicious influence they sought to avert by sacrifices. The Israelites had brought this superstition, and the idolatry to which it gave rise, from Egypt.

The Seirim were the gods whom the Israelites worshipped and went a whoring after in Egypt (Jos 24:14; Eze 20:7; Eze 23:3, Eze 23:8, Eze 23:19, Eze 23:21, Eze 23:27). Both the thing and the name were derived from the Egyptians, who worshipped goats as gods (Josephus c. Ap . 2, 7), particularly Pan , who was represented in the form of a goat, a personification of the male and fertilizing principle in nature, whom they called Mendes and reckoned among the eight leading gods, and to whom they had built a splendid and celebrated temple in Thmuis , the capital of the Mendesian Nomos in Lower Egypt, and erected statues in the temples in all directions (cf.

Herod . 2, 42, 46; Strabo , xvii. 802; Diod. Sic. i. 18). The expression “a statute for ever” refers to the principle of the law, that sacrifices were to be offered to Jehovah alone, and not to the law that every animal was to be slain before the tabernacle, which was afterwards repealed by Moses, when they were about to enter Canaan, where it could no longer be carried out (Deu 12:15).

Lev 17:8-16 To this there are appended three laws, which are kindred in their nature, and which were binding not only upon the Israelites, but also upon the foreigners who dwelt in the midst of them. Lev 17:8-12 Lev 17:8, Lev 17:9 contain the command, that whoever offered a burnt-offering of slain-offering, and did not bring it to the tabernacle to prepare it for Jehovah there, was to be exterminated; a command which involved the prohibition of sacrifice in any other place whatever, and was given, as the further extension of this law in Deut 12 clearly proves, for the purpose of suppressing the disposition to offer sacrifice to other gods, as well as in other places.

In Lev 17:10-14 the prohibition of the eating of blood is repeated, and ordered to be observed on pain of extermination; it is also extended to the strangers in Israel; and after a more precise explanation of the reason for the law, is supplemented by instructions for the disposal of the blood of edible game. God threatens that He will inflict the punishment Himself, because the eating of blood was a transgression of the law which might easily escape the notice of the authorities.

“To set one’s face against:” i. e. , to judge. The reason for the command in Lev 17:11, “For the soul of the flesh (the soul which gives life to the flesh) is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar, to make an atonement for your souls,” is not a double one, viz. , (1) because the blood contained the soul of the animal, and (2) because God had set apart the blood, as the medium of expiation for the human soul, for the altar, i.

e. , to be sprinkled upon the altar. The first reason simply forms the foundation for the second: God appointed the blood for the altar, as containing the soul of the animal, to be the medium of expiation for the souls of men, and therefore prohibited its being used as food. “For the blood it expiates by virtue of the soul,” not “the soul” itself. בּ with כּפּר has only a local or instrumental signification (Lev 6:23; Lev 16:17, Lev 16:27; also Lev 7:7; Exo 29:33; Num 5:8).

Accordingly, it was not the blood as such, but the blood as the vehicle of the soul, which possessed expiatory virtue; because the animal soul was offered to God upon the altar as a substitute for the human soul. Hence every bleeding sacrifice had an expiatory force, though without being an expiatory sacrifice in the strict sense of the word.

Lev 17:8-16 To this there are appended three laws, which are kindred in their nature, and which were binding not only upon the Israelites, but also upon the foreigners who dwelt in the midst of them. Lev 17:8-12 Lev 17:8, Lev 17:9 contain the command, that whoever offered a burnt-offering of slain-offering, and did not bring it to the tabernacle to prepare it for Jehovah there, was to be exterminated; a command which involved the prohibition of sacrifice in any other place whatever, and was given, as the further extension of this law in Deut 12 clearly proves, for the purpose of suppressing the disposition to offer sacrifice to other gods, as well as in other places.

In Lev 17:10-14 the prohibition of the eating of blood is repeated, and ordered to be observed on pain of extermination; it is also extended to the strangers in Israel; and after a more precise explanation of the reason for the law, is supplemented by instructions for the disposal of the blood of edible game. God threatens that He will inflict the punishment Himself, because the eating of blood was a transgression of the law which might easily escape the notice of the authorities.

“To set one’s face against:” i. e. , to judge. The reason for the command in Lev 17:11, “For the soul of the flesh (the soul which gives life to the flesh) is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar, to make an atonement for your souls,” is not a double one, viz. , (1) because the blood contained the soul of the animal, and (2) because God had set apart the blood, as the medium of expiation for the human soul, for the altar, i.

e. , to be sprinkled upon the altar. The first reason simply forms the foundation for the second: God appointed the blood for the altar, as containing the soul of the animal, to be the medium of expiation for the souls of men, and therefore prohibited its being used as food. “For the blood it expiates by virtue of the soul,” not “the soul” itself. בּ with כּפּר has only a local or instrumental signification (Lev 6:23; Lev 16:17, Lev 16:27; also Lev 7:7; Exo 29:33; Num 5:8).

Accordingly, it was not the blood as such, but the blood as the vehicle of the soul, which possessed expiatory virtue; because the animal soul was offered to God upon the altar as a substitute for the human soul. Hence every bleeding sacrifice had an expiatory force, though without being an expiatory sacrifice in the strict sense of the word.

Lev 17:8-16 To this there are appended three laws, which are kindred in their nature, and which were binding not only upon the Israelites, but also upon the foreigners who dwelt in the midst of them. Lev 17:8-12 Lev 17:8, Lev 17:9 contain the command, that whoever offered a burnt-offering of slain-offering, and did not bring it to the tabernacle to prepare it for Jehovah there, was to be exterminated; a command which involved the prohibition of sacrifice in any other place whatever, and was given, as the further extension of this law in Deut 12 clearly proves, for the purpose of suppressing the disposition to offer sacrifice to other gods, as well as in other places.

In Lev 17:10-14 the prohibition of the eating of blood is repeated, and ordered to be observed on pain of extermination; it is also extended to the strangers in Israel; and after a more precise explanation of the reason for the law, is supplemented by instructions for the disposal of the blood of edible game. God threatens that He will inflict the punishment Himself, because the eating of blood was a transgression of the law which might easily escape the notice of the authorities.

“To set one’s face against:” i. e. , to judge. The reason for the command in Lev 17:11, “For the soul of the flesh (the soul which gives life to the flesh) is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar, to make an atonement for your souls,” is not a double one, viz. , (1) because the blood contained the soul of the animal, and (2) because God had set apart the blood, as the medium of expiation for the human soul, for the altar, i.

e. , to be sprinkled upon the altar. The first reason simply forms the foundation for the second: God appointed the blood for the altar, as containing the soul of the animal, to be the medium of expiation for the souls of men, and therefore prohibited its being used as food. “For the blood it expiates by virtue of the soul,” not “the soul” itself. בּ with כּפּר has only a local or instrumental signification (Lev 6:23; Lev 16:17, Lev 16:27; also Lev 7:7; Exo 29:33; Num 5:8).

Accordingly, it was not the blood as such, but the blood as the vehicle of the soul, which possessed expiatory virtue; because the animal soul was offered to God upon the altar as a substitute for the human soul. Hence every bleeding sacrifice had an expiatory force, though without being an expiatory sacrifice in the strict sense of the word.

Lev 17:8-16 To this there are appended three laws, which are kindred in their nature, and which were binding not only upon the Israelites, but also upon the foreigners who dwelt in the midst of them. Lev 17:8-12 Lev 17:8, Lev 17:9 contain the command, that whoever offered a burnt-offering of slain-offering, and did not bring it to the tabernacle to prepare it for Jehovah there, was to be exterminated; a command which involved the prohibition of sacrifice in any other place whatever, and was given, as the further extension of this law in Deut 12 clearly proves, for the purpose of suppressing the disposition to offer sacrifice to other gods, as well as in other places.

In Lev 17:10-14 the prohibition of the eating of blood is repeated, and ordered to be observed on pain of extermination; it is also extended to the strangers in Israel; and after a more precise explanation of the reason for the law, is supplemented by instructions for the disposal of the blood of edible game. God threatens that He will inflict the punishment Himself, because the eating of blood was a transgression of the law which might easily escape the notice of the authorities.

“To set one’s face against:” i. e. , to judge. The reason for the command in Lev 17:11, “For the soul of the flesh (the soul which gives life to the flesh) is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar, to make an atonement for your souls,” is not a double one, viz. , (1) because the blood contained the soul of the animal, and (2) because God had set apart the blood, as the medium of expiation for the human soul, for the altar, i.

e. , to be sprinkled upon the altar. The first reason simply forms the foundation for the second: God appointed the blood for the altar, as containing the soul of the animal, to be the medium of expiation for the souls of men, and therefore prohibited its being used as food. “For the blood it expiates by virtue of the soul,” not “the soul” itself. בּ with כּפּר has only a local or instrumental signification (Lev 6:23; Lev 16:17, Lev 16:27; also Lev 7:7; Exo 29:33; Num 5:8).

Accordingly, it was not the blood as such, but the blood as the vehicle of the soul, which possessed expiatory virtue; because the animal soul was offered to God upon the altar as a substitute for the human soul. Hence every bleeding sacrifice had an expiatory force, though without being an expiatory sacrifice in the strict sense of the word.

Lev 17:8-16 To this there are appended three laws, which are kindred in their nature, and which were binding not only upon the Israelites, but also upon the foreigners who dwelt in the midst of them. Lev 17:8-12 Lev 17:8, Lev 17:9 contain the command, that whoever offered a burnt-offering of slain-offering, and did not bring it to the tabernacle to prepare it for Jehovah there, was to be exterminated; a command which involved the prohibition of sacrifice in any other place whatever, and was given, as the further extension of this law in Deut 12 clearly proves, for the purpose of suppressing the disposition to offer sacrifice to other gods, as well as in other places.

In Lev 17:10-14 the prohibition of the eating of blood is repeated, and ordered to be observed on pain of extermination; it is also extended to the strangers in Israel; and after a more precise explanation of the reason for the law, is supplemented by instructions for the disposal of the blood of edible game. God threatens that He will inflict the punishment Himself, because the eating of blood was a transgression of the law which might easily escape the notice of the authorities.

“To set one’s face against:” i. e. , to judge. The reason for the command in Lev 17:11, “For the soul of the flesh (the soul which gives life to the flesh) is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar, to make an atonement for your souls,” is not a double one, viz. , (1) because the blood contained the soul of the animal, and (2) because God had set apart the blood, as the medium of expiation for the human soul, for the altar, i.

e. , to be sprinkled upon the altar. The first reason simply forms the foundation for the second: God appointed the blood for the altar, as containing the soul of the animal, to be the medium of expiation for the souls of men, and therefore prohibited its being used as food. “For the blood it expiates by virtue of the soul,” not “the soul” itself. בּ with כּפּר has only a local or instrumental signification (Lev 6:23; Lev 16:17, Lev 16:27; also Lev 7:7; Exo 29:33; Num 5:8).

Accordingly, it was not the blood as such, but the blood as the vehicle of the soul, which possessed expiatory virtue; because the animal soul was offered to God upon the altar as a substitute for the human soul. Hence every bleeding sacrifice had an expiatory force, though without being an expiatory sacrifice in the strict sense of the word.

Lev 17:8-16 To this there are appended three laws, which are kindred in their nature, and which were binding not only upon the Israelites, but also upon the foreigners who dwelt in the midst of them. Lev 17:8-12 Lev 17:8, Lev 17:9 contain the command, that whoever offered a burnt-offering of slain-offering, and did not bring it to the tabernacle to prepare it for Jehovah there, was to be exterminated; a command which involved the prohibition of sacrifice in any other place whatever, and was given, as the further extension of this law in Deut 12 clearly proves, for the purpose of suppressing the disposition to offer sacrifice to other gods, as well as in other places.

In Lev 17:10-14 the prohibition of the eating of blood is repeated, and ordered to be observed on pain of extermination; it is also extended to the strangers in Israel; and after a more precise explanation of the reason for the law, is supplemented by instructions for the disposal of the blood of edible game. God threatens that He will inflict the punishment Himself, because the eating of blood was a transgression of the law which might easily escape the notice of the authorities.

“To set one’s face against:” i. e. , to judge. The reason for the command in Lev 17:11, “For the soul of the flesh (the soul which gives life to the flesh) is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar, to make an atonement for your souls,” is not a double one, viz. , (1) because the blood contained the soul of the animal, and (2) because God had set apart the blood, as the medium of expiation for the human soul, for the altar, i.

e. , to be sprinkled upon the altar. The first reason simply forms the foundation for the second: God appointed the blood for the altar, as containing the soul of the animal, to be the medium of expiation for the souls of men, and therefore prohibited its being used as food. “For the blood it expiates by virtue of the soul,” not “the soul” itself. בּ with כּפּר has only a local or instrumental signification (Lev 6:23; Lev 16:17, Lev 16:27; also Lev 7:7; Exo 29:33; Num 5:8).

Accordingly, it was not the blood as such, but the blood as the vehicle of the soul, which possessed expiatory virtue; because the animal soul was offered to God upon the altar as a substitute for the human soul. Hence every bleeding sacrifice had an expiatory force, though without being an expiatory sacrifice in the strict sense of the word.

Lev 17:8-16 To this there are appended three laws, which are kindred in their nature, and which were binding not only upon the Israelites, but also upon the foreigners who dwelt in the midst of them. Lev 17:8-12 Lev 17:8, Lev 17:9 contain the command, that whoever offered a burnt-offering of slain-offering, and did not bring it to the tabernacle to prepare it for Jehovah there, was to be exterminated; a command which involved the prohibition of sacrifice in any other place whatever, and was given, as the further extension of this law in Deut 12 clearly proves, for the purpose of suppressing the disposition to offer sacrifice to other gods, as well as in other places.

In Lev 17:10-14 the prohibition of the eating of blood is repeated, and ordered to be observed on pain of extermination; it is also extended to the strangers in Israel; and after a more precise explanation of the reason for the law, is supplemented by instructions for the disposal of the blood of edible game. God threatens that He will inflict the punishment Himself, because the eating of blood was a transgression of the law which might easily escape the notice of the authorities.

“To set one’s face against:” i. e. , to judge. The reason for the command in Lev 17:11, “For the soul of the flesh (the soul which gives life to the flesh) is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar, to make an atonement for your souls,” is not a double one, viz. , (1) because the blood contained the soul of the animal, and (2) because God had set apart the blood, as the medium of expiation for the human soul, for the altar, i.

e. , to be sprinkled upon the altar. The first reason simply forms the foundation for the second: God appointed the blood for the altar, as containing the soul of the animal, to be the medium of expiation for the souls of men, and therefore prohibited its being used as food. “For the blood it expiates by virtue of the soul,” not “the soul” itself. בּ with כּפּר has only a local or instrumental signification (Lev 6:23; Lev 16:17, Lev 16:27; also Lev 7:7; Exo 29:33; Num 5:8).

Accordingly, it was not the blood as such, but the blood as the vehicle of the soul, which possessed expiatory virtue; because the animal soul was offered to God upon the altar as a substitute for the human soul. Hence every bleeding sacrifice had an expiatory force, though without being an expiatory sacrifice in the strict sense of the word.

Lev 17:8-16 To this there are appended three laws, which are kindred in their nature, and which were binding not only upon the Israelites, but also upon the foreigners who dwelt in the midst of them. Lev 17:8-12 Lev 17:8, Lev 17:9 contain the command, that whoever offered a burnt-offering of slain-offering, and did not bring it to the tabernacle to prepare it for Jehovah there, was to be exterminated; a command which involved the prohibition of sacrifice in any other place whatever, and was given, as the further extension of this law in Deut 12 clearly proves, for the purpose of suppressing the disposition to offer sacrifice to other gods, as well as in other places.

In Lev 17:10-14 the prohibition of the eating of blood is repeated, and ordered to be observed on pain of extermination; it is also extended to the strangers in Israel; and after a more precise explanation of the reason for the law, is supplemented by instructions for the disposal of the blood of edible game. God threatens that He will inflict the punishment Himself, because the eating of blood was a transgression of the law which might easily escape the notice of the authorities.

“To set one’s face against:” i. e. , to judge. The reason for the command in Lev 17:11, “For the soul of the flesh (the soul which gives life to the flesh) is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar, to make an atonement for your souls,” is not a double one, viz. , (1) because the blood contained the soul of the animal, and (2) because God had set apart the blood, as the medium of expiation for the human soul, for the altar, i.

e. , to be sprinkled upon the altar. The first reason simply forms the foundation for the second: God appointed the blood for the altar, as containing the soul of the animal, to be the medium of expiation for the souls of men, and therefore prohibited its being used as food. “For the blood it expiates by virtue of the soul,” not “the soul” itself. בּ with כּפּר has only a local or instrumental signification (Lev 6:23; Lev 16:17, Lev 16:27; also Lev 7:7; Exo 29:33; Num 5:8).

Accordingly, it was not the blood as such, but the blood as the vehicle of the soul, which possessed expiatory virtue; because the animal soul was offered to God upon the altar as a substitute for the human soul. Hence every bleeding sacrifice had an expiatory force, though without being an expiatory sacrifice in the strict sense of the word.