Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 21:22
He shall eat the bread of his God, [both] of the most holy, and of the holy.
22. both of the most holy, and of the holy ] This distinction is not recognised elsewhere. In Lev 22:1-16, where there is ample opportunity for the distinction, the offerings are spoken of in general terms as holy things. It is therefore probably the insertion of a later reviser.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Lev 21:22
He shall eat the bread of his God.
The Divine banquet
It is not easy to say whether the words, bread of his God, refer generally to the sacrifices and offerings, or specially to the shewbread. We take them as pointing to the latter; as, indeed, in any interpretation of the expression, the shewbread must be included, if not mainly intended. It was called the shewbread; or, more properly, the bread of the presence; the bread that stood on the Kings table, and in the Kings presence; the bread which was therefore intimately connected with Him who is called the Angel of the Presence (Isa 62:9); the bread which was associated with Him whose presence went with Israel whithersoever they went (Exo 33:14).
I. It is provided by God. As in carrying out His purpose in the old creation, He provided every fruit-bearing tree for man, so, in accomplishing the new creation, He has supplied the food convenient. He has made the provision for His house; and He has also blessed it. For the sustaining the life which He imparts, He provides the food required.
II. It is prepared by God himself. Moses, as representing God, prepared the twelve loaves; and God Himself has prepared the better bread, the flesh of the Son of Man. A body hast Thou prepared Me. In the history of the birth, the life, the sorrows, the hardships, the blood-shedding, the death of the incarnate Son of God, we have a description of the way it, which the shewbread or presence-bread of the Church was prepared, according to Gods own method, for our everlasting food.
III. It is given to us by God. God causes it to be provided for us; nay, He prepares it Himself; and then having thus provided and prepared it, He gives it: God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son (Joh 3:16); The bread that I will give is My flesh, which I will give, &c.
IV. Who they are who feast on it. Perhaps the answer to such a question will be–Gods priesthood, His Church. Nor would this be incorrect; yet it would be defective. No doubt this heavenly bread is for them, just as the tree of life was for Adam, or the Temple shewbread was for the sons of Aaron. But it is so specially called the bread of our God; and the table on which it is set is so specially Gods own table; and the place where it is to be eaten is so manifestly the royal banquet-hall of heaven, that we come to the conclusion that God Himself is partaker of this feast as well as we. The King, sitting at His own table, in His own festal chamber, not only feeds His guests, bat Himself partakes of that which is set before them. Israels various sacrifices and offerings of all kinds were the various dishes set upon the great Temple table; each of them full of meaning; each of them containing that which would satisfy and comfort; every one of them setting forth some part of the glorious fulness of the God-man, as the true food of souls; and all of them together representing that complete and blessed feast of fat things partaken of by God and His redeemed, in some measure now, but hereafter to be more fully enjoyed at the great marriage-supper in the New Jerusalem, when that shall be fulfilled, so long realised but in parts and fragments, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with Me (Rev 3:20). (H. Bonar, D. D.)
The bread of God
It was an ancient heathen notion that in sacrifice food was provided for the deity in order thus to show him honour. And, doubtless, in Israel, ever prone to idolatry, there were many who rose no higher than this gross conception of the meaning of such words. Thus, in Psa 50:8-15, God sharply rebukes Israel for so unworthy thoughts of Himself, using language at the same time which teaches the spiritual meaning of the sacrifice, regarded as the food or bread of God . . . Of which language the plain teaching is this. If the sacrifices are called in the law the bread of God, God asks not this bread from Israel in any material sense, or for any material need. He asks that which the offerings symbolise; thanksgiving, loyal fulfilment of covenant engagements to Him, and that loving trust which will call on Him in the day of trouble. Even sol Gratitude, loyalty, trust! this is the food of God, this the bread which He desires that we should offer, the bread which those Levitical sacrifices symbolised. For even as man, when hungry, craves food, and cannot be satisfied without it, so God, who is Himself Love, desires our love, and delights in seeing its expression in all those offices of self-forgetting and self-sacrificing service in which love manifests itself. This is to God even as is food to us. Love cannot be satisfied except with love returned; and we may say, with deepest humility and reverence, the God of love cannot be satisfied without love returned. Hence it is that the sacrifices, which in various ways symbolize the self-offerings of love and the fellowship of love, are called by the Holy Ghost the food or bread of God. And yet we must, on no account, hasten to the conclusion, as many do, that therefore the Levitical sacrifices were only intended to express and symbolise the self-offering of the worshipper, and that this exhausts their significance. On the contrary, the need of infinite love for this bread of God cannot be adequately met and satisfied by the self-offering of any creature, and, least of all, by the self-offering of a sinful creature, whose very sin lies just in this, that he has fallen away from perfect love. The symbolism of the sacrifice as the food of God, therefore, by this very phrase, points toward the self-offering in love of the eternal Son to the Father, and in behalf of sinners for the Fathers sake. It was the sacrifice on Calvary which first became, in innermost reality, that bread of God, which the ancient sacrifices were only in symbol. It was this, not regarded as satisfying Divine justice (though it did this), but as satisfying the Divine love; because it was the supreme expression of the perfect love of the incarnate Son of God to the Father, in His becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross. (S. H. Kellogg, D. D.)
.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Which a priest having any uncleanness upon him might not do; whereby God would show the great difference between natural infirmities sent upon a man by God, and moral defilements which a man brought upon himself. What was
holy, and what
most holy, was declared before. See Lev 2:3; 6:17; 7:1; 14:13; 22:10.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
He shall eat the bread of his God,…. That part of the sacrifices which was appropriated by the Lord to the priests, for the maintenance of them and their families; for though their natural infirmities disqualified them for service, yet they did not become hereby impure, either in a moral nor ceremonial sense, and might eat of the sacrifices, which impure persons might not; and so the tradition is, blemished persons, whether their blemishes are fixed or transient, may divide and eat, but not offer g; these being priests, and having no inheritance, nor any way of getting their livelihood, provision is made for them that they might not perish through their defects in nature, which were not voluntary and brought upon them by themselves, but by the providence of God; and such were allowed to eat
[both] of the most holy and of the holy; there were things the priests eat of, which were most holy, as what remained of the meat offerings, and of the sin offerings, and of the trespass offerings, which only the males of the priest’s family might eat of, and that only in the holy place; and there were others less holy, the lighter holy things, as the Jews call them, as the wave breast, and heave shoulder, and the tithes and firstfruits, which were eaten of by all in their families, their daughters as well as their sons, and in their own houses; now of each of these might the blemished priests eat; see Nu 18:9, &c.
g Misn. Zebachim, c. 12. sect. 1.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Persons afflicted in the manner described might eat the bread of their God, however, the sacrificial gifts, the most holy and the holy, i.e., the wave-offerings, the first-fruits, the firstlings, tithes and things laid under a ban (Num 18:11-19 and Num 18:26-29), – that is to say, they might eat them like the rest of the priests; but they were not allowed to perform any priestly duty, that they might not desecrate the sanctuary of the Lord (Lev 21:23, cf. Lev 21:12).
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
22. He shall eat the bread of his God. He permits them indeed to eat of the sacrifices, because no uncleanness on account of their natural defects could prevent them from partaking of the sacred meals; (192) they are only forbidden to appear in God’s presence as mediators to propitiate Him. And here the imperfection of the legal service betrays itself; for nothing could be found among men which could fully represent the truth. Since then the defects of men rendered it necessary to separate the two connected things, viz., the honor and the burden, hence the Israelites were admonished that another priest was promised them, in whom nothing would be wanting for the consummation of all virtues and perfection. Finally, Moses relates that he delivered God’s commands not only to Aaron and his sons, but to all the people likewise; so that the humblest of them might be the censor of the priests (193) if in anything they fell short.
(192) “ La nouristure assignee aux enfans d’Aaron.” — Fr.
(193) “ Peust contreroler, par maniere de dire, les Sacrificateurs :” might, so to say, control the priests. — Fr.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(22) He shall eat the bread of his God.But though unfit for serving at the altar, and reduced to do the menial work connected with the sanctuary, he was not only allowed to partake of the less holy sacrificial gifts, such as the peace shoulder, the tithes, and the first-fruits, but also to eat what remained of the meat-offerings, the sin-offerings, and the trespass-offerings, which were most holy. (See Lev. 2:3.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
22. He shall eat The blemishes exclude only from the activities of the priest’s office, not from its emoluments. Hence no injustice was suffered.
Of the most holy See Lev 2:3, note.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Lev 21:22 He shall eat the bread of his God, [both] of the most holy, and of the holy.
Ver. 22. He shall eat the bread. ] So might not the unclean priests. Lev 22:3 Our involuntary weaknesses shall not debar us from benefit by Christ.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
both: Lev 2:3, Lev 2:10, Lev 6:16, Lev 6:17, Lev 6:29, Lev 7:1, Lev 24:8, Lev 24:9, Num 18:9, Num 18:10
and of the holy: Lev 22:10-13, Num 18:10, Num 18:19
Reciprocal: Lev 3:11 – the food Lev 6:18 – the males Lev 6:25 – it is Lev 10:12 – Take Lev 14:13 – it is most holy Lev 22:4 – holy things Lev 22:7 – General Lev 22:25 – the bread 2Ch 31:16 – his daily Eze 42:13 – the most holy
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Lev 21:22. He shall eat Which a priest having any uncleanness might not do: whereby God would show the great difference between natural infirmities sent upon a man by God, and moral defilements which a man brought upon himself.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
21:22 He shall eat the bread of his God, [both] of the {q} most holy, and {r} of the holy.
(q) As of sacrifice for sin.
(r) As of the tithes and first fruits.