Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 1:10
And if his offering [be] of the flocks, [namely], of the sheep, or of the goats, for a burnt sacrifice; he shall bring it a male without blemish.
( b) Sheep or Goat (10 13)
The oblation from the flock was made in the same manner as that from the herd. The whole of the ceremonial is not repeated, but an additional detail is supplied; the Burnt-Offering is killed ‘on the side of the altar northward’ as also the Sin-Offering and Guilt-Offering. By a slight transposition of words Lev 1:12 will read thus: ‘And he shall cut it into its pieces, and the priest shall lay them in order, and its head and its fat, on the wood ’
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Of the flocks – These directions are more brief than those for the bullock. The burnt-offering of the sheep must have been that with which the people were most familiar in the daily morning and evening service. Exo 29:38-42. Sheep were preferred for sacrifice when they could be obtained, except in some special sin-offerings in which goats were required Lev 4:23; Lev 9:3; Lev 16:5. The lamb without blemish is a well-known type of Christ. Heb 9:14; 1Pe 1:19.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 10. His offering be of the flocks] See Clarke on Le 1:2.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
10-13. if his offering be of theflocksThose who could not afford the expense of a bullockmight offer a ram or a he-goat, and the same ceremonies were to beobserved in the act of offering.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And if his offering be of the flocks,…. As it might be:
[namely], of the sheep, or of the goats for a burnt sacrifice; which were both typical of Christ, [See comments on Le 1:2]
he shall bring it a male without blemish; [See comments on Le 1:3].
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
With regard to the mode of sacrificing, the instructions already given for the oxen applied to the flock (i.e., to the sheep and goats) as well, so that the leading points are repeated here, together with a more precise description of the place for slaughtering, viz., “ by the side of the altar towards the north, ” i.e., on the north side of the altar. This was the rule with all the slain-offerings; although it is only in connection with the burnt-offerings, sin-offerings, and trespass-offerings (Lev 4:24, Lev 4:29, Lev 4:33; Lev 6:18; Lev 7:2; Lev 14:13) that it is expressly mentioned, whilst the indefinite expression “ at the door (in front) of the tabernacle ” is applied to the peace-offerings in Lev 3:2, Lev 3:8, Lev 3:13, as it is to the trespass-offerings in Lev 4:4, from which the Rabbins have inferred, though hardly upon good ground, that the peace-offerings could be slaughtered in any part of the court. The northern side of the altar was appointed as the place of slaughtering, however, not from the idea that the Deity dwelt in the north ( Ewald), for such an idea is altogether foreign to Mosaism, but, as Knobel supposes, probably because the table of shew-bread, with the continual meat-offering, stood on the north side in the holy place. Moreover, the eastern side of the altar in the court was the place for the refuse, or heap of ashes (Lev 1:16); the ascent to the altar was probably on the south side, as Josephus affirms that it was in the second temple ( J. de bell. jud. v. 5, 6); and the western side, or the space between the altar and the entrance to the holy place, would unquestionably have been the most unsuitable of all for the slaughtering. In Lev 1:12 is to be connected per zeugma with htiw amguez , “ let him cut it up according to its parts, and (sever) its head and its fat.”
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
10 And if his offering be of the flocks, namely, of the sheep, or of the goats, for a burnt sacrifice; he shall bring it a male without blemish. 11 And he shall kill it on the side of the altar northward before the LORD: and the priests, Aaron’s sons, shall sprinkle his blood round about upon the altar. 12 And he shall cut it into his pieces, with his head and his fat: and the priest shall lay them in order on the wood that is on the fire which is upon the altar: 13 But he shall wash the inwards and the legs with water: and the priest shall bring it all, and burn it upon the altar: it is a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD. 14 And if the burnt sacrifice for his offering to the LORD be of fowls, then he shall bring his offering of turtledoves, or of young pigeons. 15 And the priest shall bring it unto the altar, and wring off his head, and burn it on the altar; and the blood thereof shall be wrung out at the side of the altar: 16 And he shall pluck away his crop with his feathers, and cast it beside the altar on the east part, by the place of the ashes: 17 And he shall cleave it with the wings thereof, but shall not divide it asunder: and the priest shall burn it upon the altar, upon the wood that is upon the fire: it is a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD.
Here we have the laws concerning the burnt-offerings, which were of the flock or of the fowls. Those of the middle rank, that could not well afford to offer a bullock, would bring a sheep or a goat; and those that were not able to do that should be accepted of God if they brought a turtle-dove or a pigeon. For God, in his law and in his gospel, as well as in his providence, considers the poor. It is observable that those creatures were chosen for sacrifice which were most mild and gentle, harmless and inoffensive, to typify the innocence and meekness that were in Christ, and to teach the innocence and meekness that should be in Christians. Directions are here given, 1. Concerning the burnt-offerings of the flock, v. 10. The method of managing these is much the same with that of the bullocks; only it is ordered here that the sacrifice should be killed on the side of the altar northward, which, though mentioned here only, was probably to be observed concerning the former, and other sacrifices. Perhaps on that side of the altar there was the largest vacant space, and room for the priests to turn them in. It was of old observed that fair weather comes out of the north, and that the north wind drives away rain; and by these sacrifices the storms of God’s wrath are scattered, and the light of God’s countenance is obtained, which is more pleasant than the brightest fairest weather. 2. Concerning those of the fowls. They must be either turtle-doves (and, if so, “they must be old turtles,” say the Jews), or pigeons, and, if so, they must be young pigeons. What was most acceptable at men’s tables must be brought to God’s altar. In the offering of these fowls, (1.) The head must be wrung off, “quite off,” say some; others think only pinched, so as to kill the bird, and yet leave the head hanging to the body. But it seems more likely that it was to be quite separated, for it was to be burnt first. (2.) The blood was to be wrung out at the side of the altar. (3.) The garbages with the feathers were to be thrown by upon the dunghill. (4.) The body was to be opened, sprinkled with salt, and then burnt upon the altar. “This sacrifice of birds,” the Jews say, “was one of the most difficult services the priests had to do,” to teach those that minister in holy things to be as solicitous for the salvation of the poor as for that of the rich, and that the services of the poor are as acceptable to God, if they come from an upright heart, as the services of the rich, for he accepts according to what a man hath, and not according to what he hath not, 2 Cor. viii. 12. The poor man’s turtle-doves, or young pigeons, are here said to be an offering of a sweet-smelling savour, as much as that of an ox or bullock that hath horns or hoofs. Yet, after all, to love God with all our heart, and to love our neighbour as ourselves, is better than all burnt-offerings and sacrifices, Mark xii. 33.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Verses 10-13:
The ritual to be followed was the same if the burnt sacrifice were of a bull, a ram, or a he-goat.
“Northward,” was the side of the altar upon which the animal was to be slaughtered. The reason for this: to the east was the pile of ashes, to the west was the tabernacle, the “ascent” (steps) to the altar was to the south; the northward would be the most convenient side for the animal to be slain.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(10) Of the flocks.Bullocks of course could only be offered by the wealthy. Hence the law now provides for those who could not afford so costly a sacrifice. They are to bring a lamb of the first year, which was the ordinary burnt offering in the time of Christ, and not a goat. The directions given with regard to the burnt offering from bullocks, equally apply to the burnt offering from the flock (Lev. 1:10-13). They are therefore not repeated.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
10, 11. Offering of the flocks The burnt offering of a sheep or goat differed from that of the herd in these particulars: The sheep was to be killed on the side of the altar northward, for reasons not assigned: the impressive ceremony of laying the hand upon the head of the victim is absent; and also the declaration that it shall be accepted for an atonement. Hence we infer that either this offering, as well as that which follows, was not expiatory, or that the peculiar nature of the burnt offering was well understood. See Concluding Note, (1.)
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The Offering of a Ram or a He-Goat ( Lev 1:10-13 ).
Much in these next three verses is summarised because it is the same procedure as for the offering of the bull-ox. The three things emphasised are the death with the offering of the blood, the offering of the remainder by burning on the altar, and the washing of the innards and legs. These were the essentials of the offering. The offering ‘at the door of the tabernacle’, the laying on of the hand, the ‘giving’ (presenting) of the blood and the building up of the fire are all assumed. (As hands are later constantly laid on sheep and goats (Lev 3:8; Lev 3:13; Lev 4:24; Lev 4:29 etc.) we can be sure that it happened here, as with the bull ox). This brings out that the essence of the offering was of it being offered up.
Lev 1:10
‘And if his oblation be of the flock, of the sheep, or of the goats, for a burnt-offering, he shall offer it a male without blemish.’
Again the offering was to be a male without blemish. To offer a female would be to avoid offering the life-giver, the strength of the flock. (Females were, however, acceptable for lesser offerings). To offer anything that was blemished would be an insult to God and would indicate the attitude of Cain rather than that of Abel (Genesis 4). For dedication to God only the best is good enough.
Lev 1:11-13
‘And he shall kill it on the side of the altar northward before Yahweh, and Aaron’s sons, the priests, shall sprinkle its blood on the altar round about, and he shall cut it into its pieces, with its head and its fat, and the priest shall lay them in order on the wood that is on the fire which is on the altar, but the inwards and the legs shall he wash with water; and the priest shall offer the whole, and burn it on the altar: it is a burnt-offering, an offering made by fire, of a pleasing odour to Yahweh.’
“He shall kill it on the side of the altar northward before Yahweh.” This is the only case where such specific directions are given about where the slaughter was to take place, and it is probably to be seen as applying to all whole burnt offerings, and sin and guilt sacrifices (but not necessarily peace offerings because of their multiplicity), unless we are to see it as contrasting with the fact that the offering of the bull had pride of place at the door of the tabernacle. However, that is unlikely. Slaying in the courtyard was itself probably seen as ‘slaying at the door of the tabernacle’. For in fact to the east of the altar was the place of the ashes where rubbish could also be dealt with (Lev 1:16). And to the west was the tabernacle itself, and, between the tabernacle and the altar, the laver (wash basin). This side had to be kept clear for the movement of the priests in and out, and out of respect for Yahweh. The offerers would have gathered in the courtyard, but would not be expected to crowd the actual entrance to the Tabernacle.
Thus it was probably recognised that northwards of the altar was where all actual slaughter would take place (it was so later in the Temple) with the exception made when there was a multiplicity of peace offerings (see Lev 6:25). If this was not a general instruction it is difficult to see why comparative instructions were never repeated in any form elsewhere in these chapters, and why it should only be applied to the sheep and goats offered as a whole burnt offering. Thus northward of the altar appears to be where in general all the animals were to be slain. It ensured orderliness. The same instructions as before are then summarised.
The pattern for the sheep and goats is the same as for the bull-ox, although with these the priest is said to ‘offer’ (hiphil of qarab – cause to draw near) the whole before he burns it. This is because the offerer offering it at the door of the tent of meeting is not mentioned and it was necessary to thus emphasise that the offering was ‘offered’ before Yahweh prior to being offered up. It must not be seen as done casually or mechanically. The pieces here are arranged on the altar by a single priest in contrast with the bull ox, presumably because of their smaller size.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Of the Flock
v. 10. And if his offering be of the flocks, namely, of the sheep or of the goats, for a burnt sacrifice, v. 11. And he shall kill it on the side of the altar northward, v. 12. And he shall cut it into his pieces, v. 13. But he shall wash the inwards and the legs with water,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
This seems to have been a provision made for poorer Israelites, that such as had not ability to offer a beast of great expense, might bring a less. Luk 2:24 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Lev 1:10 And if his offering [be] of the flocks, [namely], of the sheep, or of the goats, for a burnt sacrifice; he shall bring it a male without blemish.
Ver. 10. A male without blemish. ] But “cursed be the deceiver that hath in his flock a male, and voweth and sacrificeth unto God a corrupt thing.” Mal 1:14
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
of the flocks: Lev 1:2, Gen 4:4, Gen 8:20, Isa 53:6, Isa 53:7, Joh 1:29
a burnt sacrifice: Olah, a burnt offering, from alah, to ascend, because this offering ascended, as it were, to God in flame and smoke, being wholly consumed; for which reason its is called in the Septuagint, , a whole burnt offering. This was the most important of all the sacrifices; and no part of it was eaten either by the priest or the offerer, but the whole was offered to God. It has been sufficiently shown by learned men, that almost every nation of the earth, in every age, had their burnt offerings, from the persuasion that there was no other way to appease the incensed gods; and they even offered human sacrifices, because they imagined that life was necessary to redeem life, and that the gods would be satisfied with nothing less.
a male: Lev 1:3, Lev 4:23, Lev 22:19, Mal 1:14
Reciprocal: Gen 15:9 – General Exo 12:5 – be without Lev 1:17 – it is Lev 3:6 – be of Lev 3:12 – a goat Lev 12:6 – a lamb Lev 14:10 – he lambs Lev 16:3 – a ram for a burnt offering Lev 22:18 – Whatsoever Lev 23:12 – General Num 6:14 – one he 1Sa 10:3 – three kids Ezr 6:9 – young bullocks Heb 9:19 – the blood
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Lev 1:10-13. Offering of Sheep or Goat.The ritual is identical. The choice of victimmore or less expensiveis left to the worshipper, Lev 1:11 adds the detail of northward (cf. Lev 4:24, and Lev 7:2). Eastward is the tent or Temple building (the whole sanctuary lies E. and W.); W. is the laver, S. is the approach.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
elete_me Lev 1:10-13
THE SACRIFICIAL BURNING
Lev 1:6-9; Lev 1:10-13; Lev 1:14-17
“And he shall flay the burnt offering, and cut it into its pieces. And the sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire upon the altar, and lay wood in order upon the fire: and Aarons sons, the priests, shall lay the pieces, the head, and the fat, in order upon the wood that is on the fire which is upon the altar: but its inwards and its legs shall he wash with water: and the priest shall burn the whole on the altar, for a burnt offering, an offering made by fire of a sweet savour unto the Lord And he shall cut it into its pieces, with its head and its fat: and the priest shall lay them in order on the wood that is on the fire which is upon the altar: but the inwards and the legs shall he wash with water: and the priest shall offer the whole, and burn it upon the altar: it is a burnt offering, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord And he shall rend it by the wings thereof, but shall not divide it asunder: and the priest shall burn it upon the altar, upon the wood that is upon the fire: it is a burnt offering, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord.”
It was the distinguishing peculiarity of the burnt offering, from which it takes its name, that in every case the whole of it was burned, and thus ascended heavenward in the fire and smoke of the altar. The place of the burning, in this and other sacrifices, is significant. The flesh of the sin offering, when not eaten, was to be burned in a clean place without the camp. But it was the law of the burnt offering that it should be wholly consumed upon the holy altar at the door of the tent of meeting. In the directions for the burning we need seek for no occult meaning; the most of them are evidently intended simply as means to the end; namely, the consumption of the offering with the utmost readiness, ease, and completeness. Hence it must be flayed and cut into its pieces, and carefully arranged upon the wood. The inwards and the legs must be washed with water, that into the offering, as to be offered to the Holy One, might come nothing extraneous, nothing corrupt and unclean.
In Lev 1:10-13 and Lev 1:14-17 provision is made for the offering of different victims, of the flock, or of the fowls. The reason for this permitted variation, although not mentioned here, was doubtless the same which is given for a similar permission in Lev 5:7, where it is ordered that if the offerers means suffice not for a certain offering, he may bring one of less value. Poverty shall be no plea for not bringing a burnt sacrifice; to the Israelite of that time it thus set forth the truth, that “if there first be a willing heart, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not.”
The variations in the prescriptions regarding the different victims to be used in the sacrifice are but slight. The bird having been killed by the priest (why this change it is not easy to see), its crop, with its contents of food unassimilated, and therefore not a part of the bird, as also the feathers, was to be cast away. It was not to be divided, like the bullock, and the sheep or goat, simply because, with so small a creature, it was not necessary to the speedy and entire combustion of the offering. In each case alike, the declaration is made that the sacrifice, thus offered and wholly burnt upon the altar, is “an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord.”
And now a question comes before us, the answer to which is vital to the right understanding of the burnt offering, whether in its original or typical import. What was the significance of the burning? It has been very often answered that the consumption of the victim by fire symbolised the consuming wrath of Jehovah, utterly destroying the victim which represented the sinful person of the offerer. And, observing that the burning followed the killing and shedding of blood, some have even gone so far as to say that the burning typified the eternal fire of hell! But when we remember that, without doubt, the sacrificial victim in all the Levitical offerings was a type of our blessed Lord, we may well agree with one who justly calls this interpretation “hideous.” And yet many, who have shrunk from this, have yet in so far held to this conception of the symbolic meaning of the burning as to insist that it must at least have typified those fiery sufferings in which our Lord offered up His soul for sin. They remind us how often, in the Scripture, fire stands as the symbol of the consuming wrath of God against sin, and hence argue that this may justly be taken here as the symbolic meaning of the burning of the victim on the altar.
But this interpretation is nevertheless, in every form, to be rejected. As regards the use of fire as a symbol in Holy Scripture, while it is true that it often represents the punitive wrath of God, it is equally certain that it has not always this meaning. Quite as often it is the symbol of Gods purifying energy and might. Fire was not the symbol of Jehovahs vengeance in the burning bush. When the Lord is represented as sitting “as a refiner and a purifier of silver,” surely the thought is not of vengeance, but of purifying mercy. We should rather say that fire, in Scripture usage, is the symbol of the intense energy of the Divine nature, which continually acts upon every person and on every thing, according to the nature of each person or thing; here conserving, there destroying; now cleansing, now consuming. The same fire which burns the wood, hay, and stubble, purifies the gold and the silver.
Hence, while it is quite true that fire often typifies the wrath of God punishing sin, it is certain that it cannot always symbolise this, not even in the sacrificial ritual. For in the meal offering of chapter 2 it is impossible that the thought of expiation should enter since no life is offered and no blood is shed; yet this also is presented unto God in fire. The fire then in this case must mean something else than the Divine wrath, and presumably must mean one thing in all the sacrifices. And that not even in the burnt offering can the burning of the sacrifice symbolise the consuming wrath of God, becomes plain, when we observe that, according to the uniform teaching of the sacrificial ritual, atonement is already fully accomplished, prior to the burning, in the sprinkling of the blood. That the burning, which follows the atonement, should have any reference to Christs expiatory sufferings, is thus quite impossible.
We must hold, therefore, that the burning can only mean in the burnt offering that which alone it can signify in the meal offering; namely, the ascending of the offering in consecration to God, on the one hand; and, on the other, Gods gracious acceptance and appropriation of the offering. This was impressively set forth in the case of the burnt offering presented when the tabernacle service was inaugurated; when, we are told (Lev 9:24), the fire which consumed it came forth from before Jehovah, lighted by no human hand, and was thus a visible representation of God accepting and appropriating the offering to Himself.
The symbolism of the burning thus understood, we can now perceive what must have been the special meaning of this sacrifice. As regarded by the believing Israelite of those days, not yet discerning clearly the deeper truth it shadowed forth as to the great Burnt Sacrifice of the future, it must have symbolically taught him that complete consecration unto God is essential to right worship. There were sacrifices having a different special import, in which, while a part was burnt, the offerer might even himself join in eating the remaining part, taking that for his own use. But, in the burnt offering, nothing was for himself: all was for God; and in the fire of the altar God took the whole in such a way that the offering forever passed beyond the offerers recall. In so far as the offerer entered into this conception, and his inward experience corresponded to this outward rite, it was for him an act of worship.
But to the thoughtful worshipper, one would think, it must sometimes have occurred that, after all, it was not himself or his gift that thus ascended in full consecration to God, but a victim appointed by God to represent him in death on the altar. And thus it was that, whether understood or not, the offering in its very nature pointed to a Victim of the future, in whose person and work, as the One only fully-consecrated Man, the burnt offering should receive its full explication. And this brings us to the question, What aspect of the person and work of our Lord was herein specially typified? It cannot be the resultant fellowship with God, as in the peace offering; for the sacrificial feast which set this forth was in this case wanting. Neither can it be expiation for sin; for although this is expressly represented here, yet it is not the chief thing. The principal thing, in the burnt offering, was the burning, the complete consumption of the victim in the sacrificial fire. Hence what is represented chiefly here, is not so much Christ representing His people in atoning death, as Christ representing His people in perfect consecration and entire self-surrender unto God; in a word, in perfect obedience.
Of these two things, the atoning death and the representative obedience, we think, and with reason, much of the former; but most Christians, though without reason, think less of the latter. And yet how much is made of this aspect of our Lords work in the Gospels! The first words which we hear from His lips are to this effect, when, at twelve years of age, He asked His mother, {Luk 2:49} “Wist ye not that I must be (lit.) in the things of My Father?” and after His official work began in the first cleansing of the temple, this manifestation of His character was such as to remind His disciples that it was written, “The zeal of Thy house shall eat me up”; -phraseology which brings the burnt offering at once to mind. And His constant testimony concerning Himself, to which His whole life bare witness, was in such words as these: “I came down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him that sent Me.” In particular, He especially regarded His atoning work in this aspect. In the parable of the Good Shepherd, {Joh 10:1-18} for example, after telling us that because of His laying down His life for the sheep the Father loved Him, and that to this end He had received from the Father authority to lay down His life for the sheep, He then adds as the reason of this: “This commandment have I received from My Father.” And so elsewhere {Joh 12:49-50} He says of all His words, as of all His works: “The Father hath given Me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak; the things therefore which I speak, even as the Father hath said unto Me, so I speak.” And when at last His earthly work approaches its close, and we see. Him in the agony of Gethsemane, there He appears, above all, as the perfectly consecrated One, offering Himself, body, soul, and spirit, as a whole burnt offering unto God, in those never-to-be-forgotten words, {Mat 26:39} “Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass away from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as Thou wilt.” And, if any more proof were needed, we have it in that inspired exposition {Heb 10:5-10} of Psa 40:6-8, wherein it is taught that this perfect obedience of Christ, in full consecration, was indeed the very thing which the Holy Ghost foresignified in the whole brunt offerings of the law: “When He cometh into the world, He saith, Sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not, but a body didst Thou prepare for Me; in whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin Thou hadst no pleasure: then said I, Lo, I am come (in the roll of the book it is written of Me) to do Thy will, O God.” Thus the burnt offering brings before us in type, for our faith, Christ as our Saviour in virtue of His being the One wholly surrendered to the will of the Father. Nor does this exclude, but rather defines, the conception of Christ as our substitute and representative. For He said that it was for our sakes that He “sanctified,” or “consecrated” Himself; {Joh 17:19} and while the New Testament represents Him as saving us by His death as an expiation for sin, it no less explicitly holds Him forth to us as having obeyed in our behalf, declaring {Rom 5:19} that it is by the obedience of the One Man that “many are made righteous.” And, elsewhere, the same Apostle represents the incomparable moral value of the atoning death of the cross as consisting precisely in this fact, that it was a supreme act of self-renouncing obedience, as it is written: {Php 2:6-9} “Being in the form of God, He yet counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross. Wherefore also God highly exalted Him, and gave unto Him the name which is above every name.”
And so the burnt offering teaches us to remember that Christ has not only died for our sins, but has also consecrated Himself for us to God in full self-surrender in our behalf. We are therefore to plead not only His atoning death, but also the transcendent merit of His life of full consecration to the Fathers will. To this, the words, three times repeated concerning the burnt offering (Lev 1:9, Lev 1:13, Lev 1:17), in this chapter, blessedly apply: it is “an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour,” a fragrant odour, “unto the Lord.” That is, this full self-surrender of the holy Son of God unto the Father is exceedingly delightful and acceptable unto God. And for this reason it is for us an ever-prevailing argument for our own acceptance, and for the gracious bestowment for Christs sake of all that there is in Him for us.
Only let us ever remember that we cannot argue, as in the case of the atoning death, that as Christ died that we might not die, so He offered Himself in full consecration unto God, that we might thus be released from this obligation. Here the exact opposite is the truth. For Christ Himself said in His memorable prayer, just before His offering of Himself to death, “For their sakes I sanctify (marg. “consecrate”) Myself, that they also might be sanctified in truth.” And thus is brought before us the thought, that if the sin offering emphasised, as we shall see, the substitutionary death of Christ, whereby He became our righteousness, the burnt offering, as distinctively, brings before us Christ as our sanctification, offering Himself without spot, a whole burnt offering to God. And as by that one life of sinless obedience to the will of the Father He procured our salvation by His merit, so in this respect He has also become our one perfect Example of what consecration to God really is. A thought this is which, with evident allusion to the burnt offering, the Apostle Paul brings before us, charging us {Eph 5:2} that we “walk in love, as Christ also loved us, and gave Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for an odour of a sweet smell.”
And the law further suggests that no extreme of spiritual need can debar anyone from availing Himself of our great Burnt sacrifice. A burnt offering was to be received even from one who was so poor that he could bring but a turtledove or a young pigeon (Lev 1:14). One might, at first thought, not unnaturally say: Surely there can be nothing in this to point to Christ; for the true Sacrifice is not many, but one and only. And yet the very fact of this difference allowed in the typical victims, when the reason of the allowance is remembered, suggests the most precious truth concerning Christ, that no spiritual poverty of the sinner need exclude him from the full benefit of Christs saving work. Provision is made in Him for all those who, most truly and with most reason, feel themselves to be poor and in need of all things. Christ, as our sanctification, is for all who will make use of Him; for all who, feeling most deeply and painfully their own failure in full consecration, would take Him, as not only their sin offering, but also their burnt offering, both their example and their strength, unto perfect self-surrender unto God. We may well here recall to mind the exhortation of the Apostle to Christian believers, expressed in language which at once reminds us of the burnt offering: {Rom 12:1} I beseech you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.