Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 17:8
And thou shalt say unto them, Whatsoever man [there be] of the house of Israel, or of the strangers which sojourn among you, that offereth a burnt offering or sacrifice,
8. of the strangers ] See p. 99.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The strangers which sojourn – The foreigners who dwell. See Lev 16:29 note.
Or sacrifice – i. e., a slaughtered offering of any kind, generally a peace-offering.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
8, 9. Whatsoever man . . . offereth. . . And bringeth it not unto the door of the tabernacleBeforethe promulgation of the law, men worshipped wherever they pleased orpitched their tents. But after that event the rites of religion couldbe acceptably performed only at the appointed place of worship. Thisrestriction with respect to place was necessary as a preventive ofidolatry; for it prohibited the Israelites, when at a distance, fromrepairing to the altars of the heathen, which were commonly in grovesor fields.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And thou shalt say unto them,…. To Aaron and his sons, and to the children of Israel, as in Le 17:2;
whatsoever man [there be] of the house of Israel: belonging to that nation, and to any of its tribes and families, of whatever age; as a young man or an old man, as the Targum of Jonathan; or of whatsoever rank, class, and condition in life:
or of the strangers which sojourn among you; that is, of the proselytes among them; not the proselytes of the gate, who were not admitted to offer sacrifice on the altar of the Lord; and if they were, they could not for non-compliance with this law be cut off from the Jewish church and commonwealth, of which they were no part, only suffered to dwell among them, but partook of none of their privileges; but this is to be understood of proselytes of righteousness, such as embraced the Jewish religion, and submitted to all the rituals of it, and had communion with the body of the people, and shared in all the immunities of their civil and church state, and so liable in case of any real practice to be cut off from them:
that offereth a burnt offering or sacrifice; any other sacrifice besides a burnt offering, as a sin offering, or a trespass offering, or a peace offering.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
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. with 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 17:13 The blood also of such hunted game as was edible, whether bird or beast, was not to be eaten either by the Israelite or stranger, but to be poured out and covered with earth. In Deu 12:16 and Deu 12:24, where the command to slay all the domestic animals at the tabernacle as slain-offerings is repealed, this is extended to such domestic animals as were slaughtered for food; their blood also was not to be eaten, but to be poured upon the earth “like water,” i.e., not quasi rem profanam et nullo ritu sacro ( Rosenmller, etc.), but like water which is poured upon the earth, sucked in by it, and thus given back to the womb of the earth, from which God had caused the animals to come forth at their creation (Gen 1:24). Hence pouring it out upon the earth like water was substantially the same as pouring it out and covering it with earth (cf. Eze 24:7-8); and the purpose of the command was to prevent the desecration of the vehicle of the soulish life, which was sanctified as the medium of expiation.
Lev 17:14-16 “ For as for the soul of all flesh…its blood makes out its soul: ” i.e., “this is the case with the soul of all flesh, that it is its blood which makes out its soul.” is to be taken as a predicate in its meaning, introduced with beth essentiale. It is only as so understood, that the clause supplies a reason at all in harmony with the context. Because the distinguishing characteristic of the blood as, that it was the soul of the being when living in the flesh; therefore it was not to be eaten in the case of any animal: and even in the case of animals that were not proper for sacrifice, it was to be allowed to run out upon the ground, and then covered with earth, or, so to speak, buried.
(Note: On the truth which lay at the foundation of this idea of the unity of the soul and blood, which others of the ancients shared with the Hebrews, particularly the early Greek philosophers, see Delitzsch ‘s bibl. Psychol. pp. 242ff. “It seems at first sight to be founded upon no other reason, than that a sudden diminution of the quantity of the blood is sure to cause death. But this phenomenon rests upon the still deeper ground, that all the activity of the body, especially that of the nervous and muscular systems, is dependent upon the circulation of the blood; for if the flow of blood is stopped from any part of the body, all its activity ceases immediately; a sensitive part loses all sensation in a very few minutes, and muscular action is entirely suspended… The blood is really the basis of the physical life; and so far the soul, as the vital principle of the body, is pre-eminently in the blood” (p. 245).)
– Lastly (Lev 17:15, Lev 17:16), the prohibition against eating “that which died” (Lev 11:39-40), or “that which was torn” (Exo 22:30), is renewed and supplemented by the law, that whoever, either of the natives or of foreigners, should eat the flesh of that which had fallen (died a natural death), or had been torn in pieces by wild beasts (sc., thoughtlessly or in ignorance; cf. Lev 5:2), and neglected the legal purification afterwards, was to bear his iniquity (Lev 5:1). Of course the flesh intended is that of animals which were clean, and therefore allowable as food, when properly slaughtered, and which became unclean simply from the fact, that when they had died a natural death, or had been torn to pieces by wild beasts, the blood remained in the flesh, or did not flow out in a proper manner. According to Exo 22:30, the (that which had fallen) was to be thrown to the dogs; but in Deu 14:21 permission is given either to sell it or give it to a stranger or alien, to prevent the plea that it was a pity that such a thing should be entirely wasted, and so the more effectually to secure the observance of the command, that it was not to be eaten by an Israelite.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
Verses 8, 9:
Excommunication and expulsion was the penalty for violation of this command. Israel evidently took this seriously, at least for a time, as is indicated by the narrative of Jos 22:10-33.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(8, 9) Whatsoever man there be.Better, what man soever there be, as it is in the Authorised Version in Lev. 17:3. Here again we have an instance of the same legislative phrase used four times in one short section (Lev. 17:3; Lev. 17:8; Lev. 17:10; Lev. 17:13), being translated differently in the Authorised Version. The law enacted in these two verses requires that all legitimate sacrifices should henceforth be presented in the appointed sanctuary, which was the centre of national unity, thus abolishing the liberty which, in accordance with patriarchal practice, had hitherto existed, that every head of a family could be his own priest, and offer up sacrifices wherever and whenever he liked. The commonwealth of Israel were now to acknowledge one altar, one high priest, and one sanctuary. This law was binding not only upon the Israelite by race, but upon strangers who took up their abode in and joined the Jewish community. For wilfully violating this law the offender incurred the penalty of excision.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
8. Strangers sacrifice For the religious privileges and obligations of strangers, see Lev 1:2; Lev 23:22, notes. The Israelites were expressly forbidden to offer burnt offerings in every place, but only “in the place which the Lord shall choose,” in order to preserve the unity of the ritual and of the nation, and to exclude idolatry. To build a rival altar was to erect a rival throne. See Jos 22:10-12. It was reasonable that resident strangers should be subjected to a law which concerned the life of the state. No sacrifice can be offered except at the door of the tabernacle, and this can be erected only in the place selected by Jehovah; (Deu 12:5-14😉 it follows that, since Mount Moriah was the last place chosen for the “house of sacrifice,” (2Ch 7:12,) the Jews, ever since their exclusion from this sacred spot, have been destitute of all lawful burnt offerings, sin offerings, and days of atonement. This wretched disability has induced a few of them to bow to Jesus Christ. To the sin-burdened Jew this is the weakest point in his religion.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
It had been permitted of GOD in the patriarchal age, that masters of houses and heads of families, might erect altars and offer sacrifices wherever they found occasion. See Gen_22:13; Gen_28:18 . Probably this indulgence had been abused, and therefore during the wilderness state it was restrained. Yet in gospel days one of the sweet promises was, that in every place incense should be offered unto the LORD, and a pure offering. Mal 1:11 . Reader! JESUS is our altar, by whom, and upon whom, we have access to GOD, to offer up spiritual sacrifices in all places continually. Heb 13:15 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Lev 17:8 And thou shalt say unto them, Whatsoever man [there be] of the house of Israel, or of the strangers which sojourn among you, that offereth a burnt offering or sacrifice,
Ver. 8. That offereth a burnt offering. ] They were strictly tied to one place, that they might be kept all in one uniform way of God’s worship appointed by himself.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
offereth = offereth up. Hebrew. alah App-43.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
that offereth: Lev 17:4, Lev 17:10, Lev 1:2, Lev 1:3, Jdg 6:26, 1Sa 7:9, 1Sa 10:8, 1Sa 16:2, 2Sa 24:25, 1Ki 18:30-38, Mal 1:11
Reciprocal: Lev 17:3 – be of Lev 18:26 – nor any stranger Lev 20:2 – Whosoever Jos 22:11 – heard Jos 22:15 – General Jos 22:19 – wherein
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Lev 17:8 f. Extension of the Rule to Resident Aliens.Strangers, often referred to in H (cf. Lev 19:34), are men of alien race, frequently broken men from other countries, Jiving more or less permanently in Palestine, and therefore naturally expected to conform to many of its religious practices (cf. Lev 17:12), while without the special rights of a Hebrew, and therefore liable to oppression unless specially protected, as by H (Deu 1:16*, p. 110).
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Lev 17:8-16 contain three laws that relate to each other and were binding on both the Israelites and the foreigners who lived among them. Apparently God permitted resident aliens to preserve some of their traditional customs.
The same prohibition against slaughtering sacrificial animals applied to the offering of burnt offerings and peace offerings. The Israelites were to offer these sacrifices only at the brazen altar for the reasons already explained.