{"commentary":{"id":"john-gill","name":"John Gill Bible Commentary","website":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gill_(theologian)","licenseUrl":"https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/","licenseNotes":null,"licenseNotice":null,"englishName":"John Gill Bible Commentary","language":"eng","textDirection":"rtl","sha256":"f6fcfd6c3a726dc834cfaf1ae1cd0bf49bffb88c1246ac3500699e8af7be71a5","availableFormats":["json"],"listOfBooksApiLink":"/api/c/john-gill/books.json","listOfProfilesApiLink":"/api/c/john-gill/profiles.json","numberOfBooks":66,"totalNumberOfChapters":1189,"totalNumberOfVerses":29707,"totalNumberOfProfiles":0,"languageName":"English","languageEnglishName":"English"},"book":{"id":"LEV","commentaryId":"john-gill","name":"Leviticus","commonName":"Leviticus","introduction":"INTRODUCTION TO LEVITICUS \n\nThis book is commonly called by the Jews Vajikra, from the first word with which it begins, and sometimes , \"the law of the priests\" (a); and this is its name in the Syriac and Arabic versions: by the Septuagint interpreters it is called 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. \n\n\"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;'' \n\nand 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. \n\n(a) T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 103. 2. \n\n\n\nNext: Leviticus Chapter 1\n\n","order":3,"numberOfChapters":27,"sha256":"2e83df7e7938b026cc82e77eb0cf267b3095a9b41c834cb0062f7638ae0ce882","firstChapterNumber":1,"firstChapterApiLink":"/api/c/john-gill/LEV/1.json","firstChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"john-gill","book":"LEV","chapter":1},"lastChapterNumber":27,"lastChapterApiLink":"/api/c/john-gill/LEV/27.json","lastChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"john-gill","book":"LEV","chapter":27},"totalNumberOfVerses":846},"chapter":{"number":5,"content":[{"type":"verse","number":1,"content":["And if a soul sin,.... The soul is put for the person, and is particularly mentioned, as Ben Melech says, because possessed of will and desire:\n\nand hear the voice of swearing; or cursing, or adjuration; not of profane swearing, and taking the name of God in vain, but either of false swearing, or perjury, as when a man hears another swear to a thing which he knows is false; or else of adjuration, either the voice of a magistrate or of a neighbour adjuring another, calling upon him with an oath to bear testimony in such a case; this is what the Jews (r) call the oath of testimony or witness, and which they say (s) is binding in whatsoever language it is heard:\n\nand is a witness; is able to bear witness to the thing he is adjured about:\n\nwhether he hath seen or known of it; what he has seen with his eyes, or knows by any means: of such a case, the Jews observe (t), that there may be seeing without knowing, or knowing without seeing, and in either case a man ought to bear witness:\n\nif he do not utter it; tell the truth, declare what he has seen or known:\n\nthen he shall bear his iniquity; he shall be charged with sin, and be obliged to acknowledge his offence, and bring a trespass offering for it: it is said (u), that the witnesses are not guilty of the oath of the testimony, but in these ten cases; if they are required; if the testimony is concerning goods; if the goods are movable; if he that requires binds himself to pay for their testimony only, in case they bear witness; if they refuse after required; if they refuse in the sanhedrim; if the adjuration or oath is made there by the name of God, or his titles; if knowledge of the testimony goes before the oath; if he particularizes his witnesses in the time of the oath, or at the time of the requirement; and if the oath is in a language they understood.\n\n(r) Misn. Sotah, c. 7. 1.((s) Maimon. & Bartenora in ib. T. Bab. Sotah, fol. 33. 1.((t) T. Bab. Shebuot, fol. 33. 2. & 34. 1.((u) Maimon. Hilchot, Shebuot, c. 9. sect. 3. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":2,"content":["Or if a soul touch any unclean thing,.... Meaning an Israelite, for only such were bound by this law, which pronounced a person unclean that touched anything that was so in a ceremonial sense; this is the general, including whatsoever by the law was unclean; the particulars follow:\n\nwhether it be a carcass of an unclean beast, as the camel, the coney, the hare, and the swine, Leviticus 11:2.\n\nor a carcass of unclean cattle; as the horse, and the ass, which were unclean for food, and their dead carcasses not to be touched, Leviticus 11:26.\n\nor the carcass of unclean creeping things: such as are mentioned in Leviticus 11:29.\n\nand if it be hidden from him; that he has touched them; or the uncleanness contracted by touching, he having inadvertently done it; or being ignorant of the law concerning such uncleanness:\n\nhe also shall be unclean; in a ceremonial sense, by thus touching them:\n\nand guilty; of a breach of the command which forbids the touching of them: this is by way of prolepsis or anticipation; for as yet the law concerning unclean beasts, and creeping things, and pollution by touching them, was not given: Jarchi and Gersom interpret this guilt, of eating of holy things, and going into the sanctuary when thus defiled: in the Jewish Misnah (w) it is said, the word \"hidden\" is twice used, to show that he is guilty, for the ignorance of uncleanness, and for the ignorance of the sanctuary.\n\n(w) Misn. Shebuot, c. 2. sect. 5. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":3,"content":["Or if he touch the uncleanness of man,.... The dead body of a man, or the bone of a dead body, or a grave, or any profluvious or menstruous person:\n\nwhatsoever uncleanness it be that a man shall be defiled withal: not morally, but ceremonially:\n\nand it be hid from him; he is not sensible that he has touched any thing ceremonially unclean:\n\nwhen he knoweth of it, then he shall be guilty: acknowledge his guilt, and offer a sacrifice for it, as after directed. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":4,"content":["Or if a soul swear,.... A rash or vain oath:\n\npronouncing with his lips; not in his heart, as Jarchi notes; not saying within himself that he would do this, or that, or the other thing, but expressing his oath plainly and distinctly, with an audible voice:\n\nto do good, or to do evil; which was either impossible or unlawful for him to do; whether the good or evil he swears to do is to himself or to another; whether he swears to do good to himself, and evil to another, or, good to another, and evil to himself, see Psalm 15:4. The Targum of Jonathan paraphrases it,\"whatsoever a man expresses, whether of anything present or future;''as if he swears he has done such and such a thing, whether good or evil; or that he will do it, be it what it will, and it is not in the power of his hands to do it, or, if he did it, it would be doing a wrong thing:\n\nwhatsoever it be that a man shall pronounce with an oath, and it be hid from him; he has forgot that he ever swore such an oath:\n\nand when he knoweth of it, then he shall be guilty in one of these; when he is told of it, and it is made clearly to appear to him, that he did at such a time, and in such a place, deliver out a rash oath concerning this, or the other thing, then he shall be chargeable with guilt in one of these; either in rashly swearing to do good when it was not in his power, or to do evil, which would have been unlawful. The Targum of Jonathan is,\"if he knows that he has falsified, and repents not, he is guilty.'' \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":5,"content":["And it shall be, when he shall be guilty in one of these things,.... Before expressed in the preceding verses; the Targum of Jonathan is,\"in one of the four things,''which Ben Gersom particularly mentions in the oath of witness, or the pollution of the sanctuary, or the pollution of its holy things, or a vain oath:\n\nthat he shall confess that he hath sinned in that thing; not make confession of sin in general, but of that particular sin he is guilty of; and this he was to do before he brought his offering, or at least at the time of his bringing it; for without confession his offering would be of no avail; and which he made, as Ben Gersom says, by laying his hand on the head of the offering, thereby signifying and declaring his guilt, and that he deserved to die as the creature would about to be sacrificed for him; or he might make a verbal confession and acknowledgment of his offence. Fagius, from the Jewish writers, has given us the form of it, which was this;\"I beseech thee, O Lord, I have sinned, I have done wickedly, I have transgressed before thee, so and so have I done; and, lo, I repent, and am ashamed of what I have done, and I will never do the same again.''Though perhaps this form may be of too modern a date, yet doubtless somewhat like this was pronounced; and they make confession of sin necessary to all sacrifices, and say (x), atonement is not made by them without repentance and confession.\n\n(x) Maimon. Hilchot Teshubah, c. 1. sect. 1. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":6,"content":["And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the Lord, for the sin which he hath sinned,.... To make atonement for it; this was typical of the sacrifice of Christ, whose soul was made an offering for sin,  \"Asham\" a trespass offering, Isaiah 53:10 where the same word is used as here:\n\na female from the flock, a lamb, or kid of the goats, for a sin offering; it is generally thought there was a difference between a trespass offering and a sin offering; but it is not easy to say wherein the difference lies; and what has been observed by learned men is not very satisfactory: and certain it is, that the same offering is here called both a trespass offering and a sin offering; and such as were men of substance, and capable of it, were to bring a female lamb or kid; it being for sins of ignorance, a sacrifice of a less value was admitted; yet it must be a lamb, typical of Christ the Lamb of God; and atonement cannot be made, even for sins of ignorance, but by the blood and sacrifice of Christ:\n\nand the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his sin; that is, by offering his sacrifice for him, which was a type of the atonement made by the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without spot and blemish. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":7,"content":["And if he be not able to bring a lamb,.... He is not possessed of a lamb, nor able to purchase one:\n\nthen he shall bring for his trespass which he hath committed, two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, unto the Lord; either the one or the other; these were common, and in great plenty in the land of Israel, as Maimonides (y) observes, which was the reason of their being ordered, since to be had cheap. The turtledoves were larger, as the Targum of Jonathan calls them, being older, and the pigeons lesser, being young; or the one were grown, and not little, and the other little, and not grown, as the Jewish writers (z) observe; and either of them were proper emblems of Christ in his purity, innocence, and meekness, by whom an atonement is made both for the rich and poor:\n\none for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; one of the turtle doves or pigeons, whichsoever were brought, was offered up as a sin offering, and the other that remained was offered up as a burnt offering; so that the poor man had two sorts of offerings out of what he brought, when the rich had but one; and may denote the completeness of his sacrifice, and the full atonement made by it.\n\n(y) Moreh Nevochim, par. 3. c. 46. (z) Maimon & Bartenora in Misn. Cholin, c. 1. sect. 5. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":8,"content":["And he shall bring them unto the priest,.... Either two turtledoves, or two young pigeons:\n\nwho shall offer that which is for the sin offering first; that which is chosen for it, as the Targum of Jonathan; and this choice was made, not by the priest, but by the man that brought the offering, who separated it, and said, lo, this is a sin offering, and after that said, lo, this is a burnt offering (a); the sin offering was offered first, which was to make atonement for sin, and then the burnt offering, to denote the divine acceptance of it; and so Ben Gersom observes, it was proper to offer the sin offering first, to atone for his sin, that after he (God) was appeased this way, he might receive his gift; for the burnt offering was as a gift. Jarchi compares it to an advocate, who first goes in to appease, and when he has appeased, the gift goes in after him:\n\nand wring off his head from his neck, but shall not divide it asunder: be it a turtledove or a young pigeon, so it was to be served; the head was not to be separated from the body, but was nipped by the nail of the priest \"in\" the neck, as it might be rendered (b); over against the neck, as the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan render it; the hinder part, or what is behind the throat, as Jarchi and Ben Molech interpret it; so that the part which was nipped was the neck; and this nip was made so large, as that the blood was let out by it, as appears from the following verse Leviticus 5:9, and yet the head was not divided from the body; the head hung by a piece of skin on the back part; of the manner of performing this, and the mystery of it; see Gill on Leviticus 1:15.\n\n(a) Ib. (Maimon & Bratenora) in Misn. Zebachim, c. 10. sect. 4. (b) Vid. Noldium, p. 611. No. 1637. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":9,"content":["And he shall sprinkle of the blood of the sin offering upon the side of the altar,.... Or \"wall\" (c) it is asked (d),\"what is the wall at which the rest of the blood is wrung out? this is the lower wall, namely, the half of the height of the altar below, under the thread (of scarlet that goes round the middle of the altar) that the rest of the blood may be squeezed at the bottom of the altar, and because of this the sin offering of the fowl is below,''that is, the sprinkling of its blood. And so Ben Gersom observes; from hence we learn, says he, that the sprinkling of the sin offering of the fowl was in the lower part of the altar; and I think this sprinkling, adds he, was not in the length, but in the breadth:\n\nand the rest of the blood shall be wrung out at the bottom of the altar; the blood sprinkled was that which dropped from it when nipped by the priest; this here was squeezed out by him, and was shed at the foot of the altar; so that the altar had all the blood, and nothing but the blood of the fowl, all the rest belonged to the priest (e): this might be an emblem both of the drops of blood which fell from Christ in the garden, and of the shedding of his blood upon the cross, whereby remission of sin was obtained, and atonement made:\n\nit is a sin offering; an offering whereby sin was typically expiated and stoned.\n\n(c)   , Sept. \"super parietem\", Pagninus, Montanus, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Drusius; \"ad parietem\", Tigurine version. (d) Maimon. in Misn. Zebachim, c. 6. sect. 4. (e) Misn. ib. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":10,"content":["And he shall offer the second for a burnt offering, according to the manner,.... That is, the second turtledove or young pigeon, after the other was made a sin offering; and the manner according to which this was offered was not according to the rite or manner of the bird chosen first for a sin offering, as the Targum of Jonathan, but according to the burnt offering of the fowl in Leviticus 1:15 so Jarchi and Ben Gersom:\n\nand the priest shall make an atonement for him, for his sin which he had sinned, and it shall be forgiven him; upon the atonement made; and so forgiveness of sin with God proceeds upon the atonement made by the blood of Christ, Hebrews 9:22. God never took one step towards it, without a regard to Christ the propitiation for sin; he promised it with a view to him; there is no instance of pardon under the Old Testament but in this way, and God always has respect to Christ in pardon, it is for his sake; and this way of forgiveness best provides for the glory of the divine perfections; there can be no better way, or infinite wisdom would have used it; there could be no other way, considering the council and covenant of peace; to pardon, without atonement and satisfaction, is not consistent with the purity, justice, and veracity of God; and to observe this great truth, the phrase is afterwards frequently repeated, \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":11,"content":["But if he be not able to bring two turtledoves, or two young pigeons,.... Which is supposing a man to be in the poorest circumstances he can well be; and such is the grace and goodness of God, that he has provided for the atonement and forgiveness of the poorest, as well as of the rich:\n\nthen he that hath sinned shall bring for his offering the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering; which is an omer, Exodus 16:36 and is as much as a man can eat in one day, as Aben Ezra remarks:\n\nhe shall put no oil upon it, neither shall he put any frankincense thereon; to distinguish it from the common meat offering, which had both, Leviticus 3:1 and to make it as easy, and as little chargeable to the poor as possible, both oil and frankincense being things of value; and some think that these were prohibited, to show that atonement and forgiveness, and even the salvation of men, are not owing to grace in them, comparable to oil, or to their prayers, signified by frankincense, and so to any or all of their duties, but to Christ alone, and his atoning sacrifice: or these were forbidden, because emblems of joy and gladness, and therefore not so proper at a confession of sin, and humiliation for it: or rather to show how disagreeable and offensive sin was to the Lord, being contrary to grace, of which oil was an emblem, and far from being acceptable to him, which frankincense might signify; and therefore being prohibited, might denote how unacceptable, yea nauseous, sin is to him; which agrees with the reason given:\n\nfor it is a sin offering, and therefore must not be honoured, as Jarchi, or must have everything removed from it that is beautiful and amiable, as Ben Gersom, such as oil and frankincense. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":12,"content":["Then shall he bring it to the priest,.... The flour just as it was, not kneaded and made into a cake, as appears by what follows:\n\nand the priest shall take his handful of it; as much of the flour as he could hold in one hand:\n\neven a memorial thereof; to bring to mind his sin, and the goodness of God in admitting of an offering for it, and forgiving it upon that:\n\nand burn it on the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the Lord; in the same manner as other burnt offerings were made:\n\nit is a sin offering; or an expiatory sacrifice for sin. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":13,"content":["And the priest shall make an atonement for him,.... By burning the handful of flour brought by him, as an emblem of the painful sufferings of Christ, whereby he made atonement for the sins of his people:\n\nas touching his sin that he hath sinned in one of these; for whatsoever sin he had committed in any of the above cases, Leviticus 5:1,\n\nand it shall be forgiven him; upon the foot of the atonement made; See Gill on Leviticus 5:10,\n\nand the remnant shall be the priest's as a meat offering; the whole tenth part of an ephah of fine flour was the priest's, excepting the handful he took and burnt, just as in the case of a common meat offering, Leviticus 2:3. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":14,"content":["And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... Out of the tabernacle of the congregation, Leviticus 1:1 he continued to speak to him:\n\nsaying, as follows. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":15,"content":["If a soul commit a trespass, and sin through ignorance in the holy things of the Lord,.... In the payment of tithes, or offering first fruits as he ought, by withholding them, or any part of them, or through eating of sacred things he ought not:\n\nthen shall he bring for his trespass unto the Lord; for it being a trespass in holy things, it might be properly called a trespass to or against the Lord; unless this is rather to be understood of the offering brought to the Lord for his trespass as follows:\n\na ram without blemish out of the flocks; out of the sheep and not the goats, as Ben Gersom observes; and this being for sacrifice, or for a trespass in holy things though ignorantly done, an offering of more value is required than for sins of ignorance in other cases, Leviticus 5:6 a type of Christ, who for his strength may be compared to a ram, and to one without blemish, for his purity and holiness, and to a choice one, selected out of the flock, for his being chosen out from among the people:\n\nwith thy estimation by shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary, for a trespass offering; that is, either an estimation was to be taken of the damage done in the holy things, an account of which was to be brought along with the ram, and the cost paid; or else the ram brought was to be of the value of, or worth shekels of silver; and the least of many being two, as Aben Ezra and Ben Gersom observe, the sense is, that the ram brought for the trespass offering should be at least worth two shekels of silver; so Jarchi and Ben Gersom. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":16,"content":["And he shall make amends for the harm that he hath done in the holy thing,.... This seems to favour the sense of the word \"estimation\", in the preceding verse, as understood of the estimate of the damage done in the holy things, which belonged to the priests, for which recompense was to be made according as the damage was valued:\n\nand shall add the fifth part thereto, and give it unto the priest; besides paying the whole damage, he was to give a fifth part of the whole to the priest; which was ordered to show the evil nature of the sin of sacrilege, though done ignorantly, and to make men careful and cautious of committing it: the fifth part, according to the Jewish writers (f), is the fourth part of that of which a man eats, (\"viz.\" of the holy things,) which is the fifth of the whole; thus, if he eats the value of a penny, he pays the penny and the fourth part of one, and so it is in all the fifths mentioned in the law; or, as Ben Gersom on the place expresses it, if he has had profit by the holy things to the value of four shekels, he pays five shekels; for the fifth of the shekels they add the fifth part to the four shekels; in this he observes, all are alike, the priest, the anointed, the prince, and a private person, for the law makes no difference between them in this:\n\nand the priest shall make an atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering; by offering it up for him:\n\nand it shall be forgiven him; after he has paid the whole damage, and a fifth part besides, and offered the trespass offering for atonement; See Gill on Leviticus 5:10.\n\n(f) Maimon. & Bartenora in Misn. Trumot, c. 6. 1. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":17,"content":["And if a soul sin, and commit any of these things which are forbidden to be done by the commandments of the Lord,.... Respecting holy things:\n\nthough he wist it not; or did not know that he had transgressed a negative command:\n\nyet he is guilty, and shall bear the iniquity; be chargeable with guilt, and is liable to punishment, and must make an atonement and satisfaction for it; see Luke 12:48. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":18,"content":["And he shall bring a ram without blemish out of the flock,.... See Gill on Leviticus 5:15.\n\nwith thy estimation for a trespass offering to the priest; along with the offering was to be brought an estimate of whatsoever damage had been done through the breach of any of the commands of God, where damage could take place, that so recompense be made as before directed; or else the ram brought was to be valued, and examined whether it was worth two shekels of silver, as before explained; see Gill on Leviticus 5:15 but no fifth was required as in the former cases:\n\nand the priest shall make atonement for him concerning his ignorance wherein he erred, and wist it not, and it shall be forgiven him; See Gill on Leviticus 5:10 this is what the Jews call \"Asham Talui\", doubtful trespass offering. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":19,"content":["It is a trespass offering,.... An offering for a trespass committed:\n\nhe hath certainly trespassed against the Lord; though committed ignorantly, and therefore an offering must be brought; for no sin of any kind must be overlooked, passed by, or forgiven, without a sacrifice, or without atonement made by sacrifice: or, \"he shall offer a trespass offering to the Lord\", or before the Lord, as Onkelos; or before the Word of the Lord, as Jonathan; and Maimonides out of Siphri (g) observes, that whereas it is said, a trespass or trespass offering to the Lord, it was not lawful for the priests to eat of it.\n\n(g) Maimon. in Misn. Temurah, c. 7. sect. 6. \n"]}]},"thisChapterLink":"/api/c/john-gill/LEV/5.json","thisChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"john-gill","book":"LEV","chapter":5},"nextChapterApiLink":"/api/c/john-gill/LEV/6.json","nextChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"john-gill","book":"LEV","chapter":6},"previousChapterApiLink":"/api/c/john-gill/LEV/4.json","previousChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"john-gill","book":"LEV","chapter":4},"numberOfVerses":19}