Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Numbers 19:2
This [is] the ordinance of the law which the LORD hath commanded, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring thee a red heifer without spot, wherein [is] no blemish, [and] upon which never came yoke:
2. a red heifer ] a red cow. The Heb. word is that ordinarily used for the full-grown animal (e.g. Gen 41:2-4; 1Sa 6:7). The reason for the particular colour is not known. The red animal and the scarlet thread may both, perhaps, have had reference to blood as an instrument of purification.
without spot ] perfect. Any blemish, such as lameness, blindness, or the malformation of a limb, would disqualify it.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
A red heifer – Red, in order to shadow forth mans earthly body, even as the name Adam bears allusion to the red earth of which mans body was fashioned.
Without spot, wherein is no blemish – As with sin-offerings generally Lev 4:3.
Upon which never came yoke – So here and elsewhere (see the marginal references), in the case of female victims.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 2. Speak unto the children of Israel that they bring thee, c.] The ordinance of the red heifer was a sacrifice of general application. All the people were to have an interest in it, and therefore the people at large are to provide the sacrifice. This Jewish rite certainly had a reference to things done under the Gospel, as the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews has remarked: “For if,” says he, “the blood of bulls and of goats,” alluding, probably, to the sin-offerings and the scape-goat, “and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God!” Heb 9:13-14. As the principal stress of the allusion here is to the ordinance of the red heifer, we may certainly conclude that it was designed to typify the sacrifice of our blessed Lord.
We may remark several curious particulars in this ordinance.
1. A heifer was appointed for a sacrifice, probably, in opposition to the Egyptian superstition which held these sacred, and actually worshipped their great goddess Isis under this form; and this appears the more likely because males in general were preferred for sacrifice, yet here the female is chosen.
2. It was to be a red heifer, because red bulls were sacrificed to appease the evil demon Typhon, worshipped among the Egyptians. See Spencer.
3. The heifer was to be without spot – having no mixture of any other colour. Plutarch remarks, De Iside et de Osiride, that if there was a single hair in the animal either white or black, it marred the sacrifice. See Calmet, and See Clarke on Nu 8:7.
4. Without blemish – having no kind of imperfection in her body; the other, probably, applying to the hair or colour.
5. On which never came yoke, because any animal which had been used for any common purpose was deemed improper to be offered in sacrifice to God. The heathens, who appear to have borrowed much from the Hebrews, were very scrupulous in this particular. Neither the Greeks nor Romans, nor indeed the Egyptians, would offer an animal in sacrifice that had been employed for agricultural purposes. Of this we have the most positive evidence from Homer, Porphyry, Virgil, and Macrobius.
Just such a sacrifice as that prescribed here, does Diomede vow to offer to Pallas. – Iliad, lib. x., ver. 291.
,
‘ ,
,
, .
“So now be present, O celestial maid;
So still continue to the race thine aid;
A yearling heifer falls beneath the stroke,
Untamed, unconscious of the galling yoke,
With ample forehead and with spreading horns,
Whose tapering tops refulgent gold adorns.”
Altered from POPE.
In the very same words Nestor, Odyss., lib. iii., ver. 382, promises a similar sacrifice to Pallas.
The Romans had the same religion with the Greeks, and consequently the same kind of sacrifices; so Virgil, Georg. iv., ver. 550.
Quatuor eximios praestanti corpore tauros
Ducit, et intacta totidem cervice juveneas.
“———From his herd he culls
For slaughter four the fairest of his bulls;
Four heifers from his female stock he took,
All fair, and all unknowing of the yoke.”
– DRYDEN.
It is very likely that the Gentiles learnt their first sacrificial rites from the patriarchs; and on this account we need not wonder to find so many coincidences in the sacrificial system of the patriarchs and Jews, and all the neighbouring nations.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The ordinance of the law, or, the constitution of the law, i.e. that which God hath ordained or established by law.
That they bring thee, at their common charge, because it was for the common good. Red; a fit colour to shadow forth both the bloody nature and complexion of sin, Isa 1:8, and the human nature, and especially the blood, of Christ, from which this water and all other rites had their purifying virtue.
Wherein is no blemish; a fit type of Christ, who was such, Heb 7:26; 1Pe 1:19.
Upon which never came yoke; whereby may be signified, either that Christ in himself was free from all the yoke or obligation of Gods command, till for our sakes he took up our yoke, and put himself under the law; or that Christ was not drawn or forced to undertake our burden and cross, but that lie did voluntarily choose it. See Joh 10:17,18.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
2. This is the ordinance of thelawan institution of a peculiar nature ordained by law for thepurification of sin, and provided at the public expense because itwas for the good of the whole community.
Speak unto the children ofIsrael, that they bring thee a red heifer without spot, &c.Thisis the only case in which the color of the victim is specified. Ithas been supposed the ordinance was designed in opposition to thesuperstitious notions of the Egyptians. That people never offered avow but they sacrificed a red bull, the greatest care being taken bytheir priests in examining whether it possessed the requisitecharacteristics, and it was an annual offering to Typhon, their evilbeing. By the choice, both of the sex and the color, provision wasmade for eradicating from the minds of the Israelites a favoriteEgyptian superstition regarding two objects of their animal worship.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
This [is] the ordinance of the law which the Lord hath commanded,…. By which it appears, that this law was not of the moral, but of the ceremonial kind, being called an ordinance, a statute, a decree of God, the King of kings; and which was founded not on any clear plain reason in the thing itself, but in the will of God, who intended it as a type and shadow of the blood and sacrifice of Christ, and of the efficacy of that to cleanse from sin; and it also appears by this, that it was not a new law now made, but which had been made already: “which the Lord hath commanded”: as is plain from what has been observed, [See comments on Nu 19:1]; and the Jews q say, that the red heifer was slain by Eleazar the day after the tabernacle was erected, even on the second day of the first month of Israel’s coming out of Egypt; and it was now repeated both on account of the priests and people, because of the priest to whom it belonged, as Aben Ezra observes, Aaron being now established in the priesthood; and because of the people, who were afraid they should die if they came near the tabernacle; now hereby they are put in mind of a provision made for the purification of them, when under any uncleanness, which made them unfit for coming to it:
saying, speak unto the children of Israel; whom this law concerned, and for whose purification it was designed; and it was at the expense not of a private person, but of the whole congregation, that the water of purifying was made; and that, as the Jews say r, that the priests might have no personal profit from it:
that they bring thee a red heifer; or “young cow”, for so the word properly signifies; one of two years old, as the Targum of Jonathan, and so says the Misnah s; though some of the Rabbins say one of three years, or of four years, or even one of five years old, would do. This instance, with others, where females are ordered to be slain, see Le 3:1; confutes the notion of such, who think the laws of Moses were made in conformity to the customs of the Egyptians, this being directly contrary to them; if they were the same in the times of Moses, they were in the times of Herodotus, who expressly says t, male oxen the Egyptians sacrifice; but it is not lawful for them to sacrifice females, for they are sacred to Isis. Indeed, according to Plutarch u and Diodorus Siculus w, the Egyptians in their times sacrificed red bullocks to Typhon, who they supposed was of the same colour, and to whom they had an aversion, accounting him the god of evil; and because red oxen were odious to them, they offered them to him; as red-haired men also were slain by them for the same reason, at the tomb of Osiris, who they say was murdered by the red-haired Typhon; but these were superstitions that obtained among them after the times of Moses, and could not be retorted to by him; a better reason is to be given why this heifer or cow was to be of a red colour:
without spot, wherein [is] no blemish; the first of these, without spot, the Jews understand of colour, that it should have no spots in it of any other colour, black or white, nor indeed so much as an hair, at least not two of another colour; and so the Targum of Jonathan, in which there is no spot or mark of a white hair; and Jarchi more particularly,
“which is perfect in redness; for if there were in it (he says) two black hairs, it was unfit;”
and so Ben Gersom, with which agrees the Misnah x; if there were in it two hairs, black or white, in one part, it was rejected; if there was one in the head, and another in the tail, it was rejected; if there were two hairs in it, the root or bottom of which were black, and the head or top red, and so on the contrary; all depended on the sight: and it must be owned, the same exactness was observed in the red oxen sacrificed by the Egyptians, as Plutarch relates y; for if the ox had but one hair black or white, they reckoned it was not fit to be sacrificed; in which perhaps they imitated the Jews: it being without blemish was what was common to all sacrifices, such as are described in
Le 22:22;
[and] upon which never came yoke; and so among the Heathens in later times, very probably in imitation of this, they used to offer to their deities oxen that never had bore any yoke; as appears from Homer, Horace, Virgil, Ovid, and Seneca, out of whom instances are produced by Bochart z. Now, though this red cow was not properly a sacrifice for sin, yet it was analogous to one, and was a type of our Lord Jesus Christ, in whom all these characters meet, and are significant. It being a female may denote the infirmities of Christ’s human nature, to which it was subject, though sinless ones; he was encompassed with, and took on him, our infirmities; and may have some respect to the woman, by whom the transgression came, which brought impurity on all human nature, which made a purification for sin necessary; and the red colour of it may point at the flesh and blood of Christ he partook of, and the sins of his people, which were laid upon him, and were as crimson and as scarlet, and the bloody sufferings he endured to make satisfaction for them; and its being without spot and blemish may denote the perfection of Christ in his person, obedience, and sufferings, and the purity and holiness of his nature; and having never had any yoke upon it may signify, that though he was made under the law, and had commands enjoined him by his father as man, yet was free from the yoke of human traditions, and from the servitude of sin, and most willingly engaged, and not by force and compulsion, in the business of our redemption and salvation.
q Seder Olam Rabba, c. 7. p. 22. r Misn. Shekalim, c. 7. sect. 7. & Maimon, in ib. s Misn. Parah, c. 1. sect. 1. t Euterpe, sive, l. 2. c. 41. u De lside. w Bibliothec. l. 1. p. 79. x Parah, c. 2. sect. 5. y Ut supra. (Bibliothec. l. 1. p. 79.) z Hierozoic. par. 1. l. 2. c. 33. vol. 322.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Preparation of the Purifying Water. – As water is the ordinary means by which all kinds of uncleanness are removed, it was also to be employed in the removal of the uncleanness of death. But as this uncleanness was the strongest of all religious defilements, fresh water alone was not sufficient to remove it; and consequently a certain kind of sprinkling-water was appointed, which was strengthened by the ashes of a sin-offering, and thus formed into a holy alkali. The main point in the law which follows, therefore, was the preparation of the ashes, and these had to be obtained by the sacrifice of a red heifer.
(Note: On this sacrifice, which is so rich in symbolical allusions, but the details of which are so difficult to explain, compare the rabbinical statutes in the talmudical tractate Para ( Mishnah, v. Surenh. vi. pp. 269ff.); Maimonides de vacca rufa; and Lundius jd. Heiligth. pp. 680ff. Among modern treatises on this subject, are Bhr’s Symbolik, ii. pp. 493ff.; Hengstenberg, Egypt and the Books of Moses, pp. 173ff.; Leyrer in Herzog’s Cycl.; Kurtz in the Theol. Studien und Kritiken, 1846, pp. 629ff. (also Sacrificial Worship of the Old Testament, pp. 422ff., Eng. transl., Tr.); and my Archologie, i. p. 58.)
Num 19:2 The sons of Israel were to bring to Moses a red heifer, entirely without blemish, and to give it to Eleazar the priest, that he might have it slaughtered in his presence outside the camp. is not a cow generally, but a young cow, a heifer, (lxx), juvenca , between the calf and the full-grown cow. , of a red colour, is not to be connected with in the sense of “quite red,” as the Rabbins interpret it; but , integra , is to be taken by itself, and the words which follow, “ wherein is no blemish, ” to be regarded as defining it still more precisely (see Lev 22:19-20). The slaying of this heifer is called , a sin-offering, in Num 19:9 and Num 19:17. To remind the congregation that death was the wages of sin, the antidote to the defilement of death was to be taken from a sin-offering. But as the object was not to remove and wipe away sin as such, but simply to cleanse the congregation from the uncleanness which proceeded from death, the curse of sin, it was necessary that the sin-offering should be modified in a peculiar manner to accord with this special design. The sacrificial animal was not to be a bullock, as in the case of the ordinary sin-offerings of the congregation (Lev 4:14), but a female, because the female sex is the bearer of life (Gen 3:20), a , i.e., lit., the fruit-bringing; and of a red colour, not because the blood-red colour points to sin (as Hengstenberg follows the Rabbins and earlier theologians in supposing), but as the colour of the most “intensive life,” which has its seat in the blood, and shows itself in the red colour of the face (the cheeks and lips); and one “upon which no yoke had ever come,” i.e., whose vital energy had not yet been crippled by labour under the yoke. Lastly, like all the sacrificial animals, it was to be uninjured, and free from faults, inasmuch as the idea of representation, which lay at the foundation of all the sacrifices, but more especially of the sin-offerings, demanded natural sinlessness and original purity, quite as much as imputed sin and transferred uncleanness. Whilst the last-mentioned prerequisite showed that the victim was well fitted for bearing sin, the other attributes indicated the fulness of life and power in their highest forms, and qualified it to form a powerful antidote to death. As thus appointed to furnish a reagent against death and mortal corruption, the sacrificial animal was to possess throughout, viz., in colour, in sex, and in the character of its body, the fulness of life in its greatest freshness and vigour.
Num 19:3-4 The sacrifice itself was to be superintended by Eleazar the priest, the eldest son of the high priest, and his presumptive successor in office; because Aaron, or the high priest, whose duty it was to present the sin-offerings for the congregation (Lev 4:16), could not, according to his official position, which required him to avoid all uncleanness of death ( Lev 21:11-12), perform such an act as this, which stood in the closest relation to death and the uncleanness of death, and for that very reason had to be performed outside the camp. The subject, to “ bring her forth ” and “ slay her, ” is indefinite; since it was not the duty of the priest to slay the sacrificial animal, but of the offerer himself, or in the case before us, of the congregation, which would appoint one of its own number for the purpose. All that the priest had to do was to sprinkle the blood; at the same time the slaying was to take place , before him, i.e., before his eyes. Eleazar was to sprinkle some of the blood seven times “ towards the opposite,” i.e., toward the front of the tabernacle ( seven times, as in Lev 4:17). Through this sprinkling of the blood the slaying became a sacrifice, being brought thereby into relation to Jehovah and the sanctuary; whilst the life, which was sacrificed for the sin of the congregation, was given up to the Lord, and offered up in the only way in which a sacrifice, prepared like this, outside the sanctuary, could possibly be offered.
Num 19:5-6 After this (Num 19:5, Num 19:6), they were to burn the cow, with the skin, flesh, blood, and dung, before his (Eleazar’s) eyes, and he was to throw cedar-wood, hyssop, and scarlet wool into the fire. The burning of the sacrificial animal outside the camp took place in the case of every sin-offering for the whole congregation, for the reasons expounded on Lev 4:11-12. But in the case before us, the whole of the sacrificial act had to be performed outside the camp, i.e., outside the sphere of the theocracy; because the design of this sin-offering was not that the congregation might thereby be received through the expiation of its sin into the fellowship of the God and Lord who was present at the altar and in the sanctuary, but simply that an antidote to the infection of death might be provided for the congregation, which had become infected through fellowship with death; and consequently, the victim was to represent, not the living congregation as still associated with the God who was present in His earthly kingdom, but those members of the congregation who had fallen victims to temporal death as the wages of sin, and, as such, were separated from the earthly theocracy (see my Archaeology, i. p. 283). In this sacrifice, the blood, which was generally poured out at the foot of the altar, was burned along with the rest, and the ashes to be obtained were impregnated with the substance thereof. But in order still further to increase the strength of these ashes, which were already well fitted to serve as a powerful antidote to the corruption of death, as being the incorruptible residuum of the sin-offering which had not been destroyed by the fire, cedar-wood was thrown into the fire, as the symbol of the incorruptible continuance of life; and hyssop, as the symbol of purification from the corruption of death; and scarlet wool, the deep red of which shadowed forth the strongest vital energy (see at Lev 14:6), – so that the ashes might be regarded “as the quintessence of all that purified and strengthened life, refined and sublimated by the fire” ( Leyrer).
Num 19:7-10 The persons who took part in this – viz., the priest, the man who attended to the burning, and the clean man who gathered the ashes together, and deposited them in a clean place for subsequent use – became unclean till the evening in consequence; not from the fact that they had officiated for unclean persons, and, in a certain sense, had participated in their uncleanness ( Knobel), but through the uncleanness of sin and death, which had passed over to the sin-offering; just as the man who led into the wilderness the goat which had been rendered unclean through the imposition of sin, became himself unclean in consequence (Lev 16:26). Even the sprinkling water prepared from the ashes defiled every one who touched it (Num 19:21). But when the ashes were regarded in relation to their appointment as the means of purification, they were to be treated as clean. Not only were they to be collected together by a clean man; but they were to be kept for use in a clean place, just as the ashes of the sacrifices that were taken away from the altar were to be carried to a clean place outside the camp (Lev 6:4). These defilements, like every other which only lasted till the evening, were to be removed by washing. The ashes thus collected were to serve the congregation , i.e., literally as water of uncleanness; in other words, as water by which uncleanness was to be removed. “ Water of uncleanness ” is analogous to “ water of sin ” in Num 8:7.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
2 This is the ordinance of the law. Because it could not but occur that, whilst the faithful were engaged in the world, they should often contract some pollution by their contact with its many impurities, the composition of the water is here described, by the sprinkling of which they might wash away, and expiate their uncleanness: and then certain kinds of pollution are specified, whereof the purification is required. God commands that a red heifer should be slain, which had never been subjected to the yoke; and that it should be burnt without the camp, together with its skin and dung; that the ashes should be gathered by a man that was clean, and laid up without the camp for the common use of the people. But, in order that the water, which was mixed with these ashes, should have the power of reconciliation, God at the same time commands that the blood should be sprinkled seven times before the altar by the finger of the priest. The object of this ceremony was twofold: for God would awaken the attention of the people to reflect more closely upon their impurity; and, although they might be pure within, still would have them carefully look around them, lest they should be polluted from without; and also taught them that, as often as they were infected by any pollution, expiation was to be sought for from elsewhere, viz., from sacrifice and sprinkling; and thus admonish them that men inquire in vain in themselves for the remedies demanded for their purification, because purity can only proceed from the sanctuary. Those, who speculate subtilty on the details, advance some questionable matters. I leave them, therefore, to the enjoyment of their conceits; let it suffice for us to consider generally what God referred to in this ceremony, and what advantage accrued from it to the people. By the red color, they suppose that sin is signified. Meanwhile, lest they should run into a manifest contradiction, they are obliged absurdly to interpret what follows, that He required a heifer perfect and without blemish, as if it were said that there should be no difference of color in her hair; whereas God demands the same thing as in the other sacrifices, which were rejected as faulty if any mark of deformity existed in them. And in this sense it is added that she should never have borne a yoke. Therefore I make no doubt but that God enjoined that a pure heifer, neither mutilated nor lame, should be chosen; and, that her perfectness might be more apparent, as yet unbroken to the yoke. What, then, is the meaning of the red color? First of all, I prefer confessing my ignorance to advancing anything doubtful; but it may be conjectured that a common and ordinary color was rather chosen, lest it should be too conspicuous, as it would have been, if either white or black. But this should be deemed sure, that a perfect heifer, and one free from every blemish, was to be offered, and one too, which had not been broken to bear the yoke by the hands of men, that the purification might have nothing of humanity about it.: But the command to offer her was given to the whole people; because, in order that we may be partakers of ablution, it is necessary that each of us should offer Christ to the Father. For, although He only, and that but once, has offered Himself, still a daily offering of Him, which is effected by faith and prayers, is enjoined to us, not such as (22) the Papists have invented, by whom in their impiety and perverseness, the Lord’s Supper has been mistakenly turned into a sacrifice, because they imagined that Christ must be daily slain, in order that His death might profit us. The offering, however, of faith and prayers, of which I speak, is very different, and by it alone we apply to ourselves the virtue and fruit of Christ’s death.
(22) See the dogmatical statement of this notion in the Creed of Pius iv.
Art: V. — “I profess, likewise, that in the Mass there is offered to God a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead; and that in the most holy Sacrament of the Eucharist there are truly, really, and substantially the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ,” etc.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
2. The ordinance of the law This use of two words, each of which signifies law or statute, occurs again only in Num 31:21, in connexion with purification. It is intended to give emphasis to the ordinance.
A red heifer No reason is assigned for the sex and color of the victim. Hence all interpretations of this symbolry must be conjectural. The following particulars have been suggested: (1.) A heifer was taken as a rebuke to pagan Egypt, which regarded her as sacred, and worshipped her as the impersonation of the goddess Isis. Herodotus says that the Egyptians sacrifice male kine, both old and young, but it is not lawful for them to sacrifice females. (2.) It was to be red, or quite red, as the rabbins interpret it, because the Egyptians sacrificed red bulls to the evil demon Typhon. (3.)
Without spot Because the Egyptians, in their selection of red bulls for sacrifice, regard as unfit the animal having a single white or black hair. See Lev 1:3; Lev 22:20-24, notes. (4.) The requirement that the heifer should be one upon which never came yoke harmonized with the ancient usage which deemed an animal which had been used for common purposes improper for sacrifice. The Homeric heroes vow to offer to Pallas “a yearling heifer which no man had yet brought under the yoke.” Il., 10: 291; Od., 3:382.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Do not overlook several leading circumstances here in the appointment of the LORD, which we find sweetly pointing to JESUS. First, the heifer was to be red. It is well known that the colour is rare and not common. Such was JESUS, one among a thousand. JESUS is called the second Adam; and the name of Adam signifies red earth. Hence to the manhood of JESUS this redness is peculiarly applicable, for the children being partakers of flesh and blood, he himself likewise took part of the same. The church sings, my beloved is white and ruddy; while in allusion to the spotless purity of his divine nature; and ruddy in allusion to the sufferings of his human nature; or in both, because of the innocency and immaculate holiness of his person. Heb 7:26 . But, perhaps, the appointment of a red heifer, had a still further reference to the LORD JESUS, who, it is well known, was red in his apparel, when in his own blood he had stained all his raiment in redeeming his people and taking vengeance of his enemies. See Isa 63:2-4 ; Rev 19:15Rev 19:15 ; Deu 32:42 . Secondly. This heifer was to be without spot, and wherein there was no blemish. Oh! how clearly did this prefigure the spotless LAMB of GOD. Joh 1:29 . Thirdly, This heifer was never to have been yoked. See, Reader! how thy Redeemer was here again represented. In redemption work, none was yoked with JESUS. No arm but his could bring salvation; and of the people there was none with him. Isa 63:5 . Neither was JESUS yoked to the service, for nothing but his own free love constrained him. I have power (saith he) to lay down my life, and I have power to take it again. Joh 10:17-18 . Reader, do not hastily pass over those precious views of thy JESUS! And before we quit the verse let us consider another beauty in it, namely, That the provision of this heifer was to be made from the united expense of all the congregation. The precept saith, Speak to the children of Israel, that they bring thee a red heifer. Yes! JESUS is provided for all his people, all his children: He is the gift of the FATHER to all his seed. And therefore John sweetly speaks of the LORD JESUS under this character, as not only our propitiation, but for the sins of the whole world. 1Jn 2:2 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Num 19:2 This [is] the ordinance of the law which the LORD hath commanded, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring thee a red heifer without spot, wherein [is] no blemish, [and] upon which never came yoke:
Ver. 2. This is the ordinance of the law, which. ] An ordinance, a law, a commanded law: all this to show the peremptoriness of the Lord in this point, that unless we lay hold upon the blood of Christ, prefigured by this red heifer, we cannot escape the damnation of hell.
That they bring thee.
A red heifer.
Never came yoke.
a Luther.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
ordinance = statute. The whole clause = Figure of speech Pleonasm (App-6), for emphasizing the lesson of the red heifer.
children = sons.
bring = take. This is the third of three events recorded during the punishment wanderings. See note on “while”, Num 15:32.
a red heifer. Christ, the Antitype.
without spot = without defect. Compare the Antitype. Heb 9:14.
no blemish. Compare 1Pe 1:19.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
red heifer
The red heifer: Type of the sacrifice of Christ as the ground of the cleansing of the believer from the defilement contracted in his pilgrim walk through this world, and illustration of the method of his cleansing. The order is:
(1) the slaying of the sacrifice;
(2) the sevenfold sprinkling of the blood, typical public testimony before the eyes of all of the complete and never-to-be-repeated putting away of all the believer’s sin as before God. Heb 9:12-14; Heb 10:10-12.
(3) the reduction of the sacrifice to ashes which are preserved and become a memorial of the sacrifice;
(4) the cleansing from defilement (sin has two aspects–guilt and uncleanness) by sprinkling with the ashes mingled with water. Water is a type of both the Spirit and the Word. Joh 7:37-39. Eph 5:26. The operation typified is this: the Holy Spirit used the Word to convict the believer of some evil allowed in his life to the hindering of his joy, growth, and service. Thus convicted, he remembers that the guilt of his sin has been met by the sacrifice of Christ 1Jn 1:7. Instead, therefore, of despairing, the convicted believer judges and confesses the defiling thing as unworthy a saint, and is forgiven and cleansed; Joh 13:3-10; 1Jn 1:7-10.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
the ordinance: Num 31:21, Heb 9:10
a red heifer: The following curious particulars have been remarked in this ordinance:
1. A heifer was appointed for sacrifice, in opposition to the Egyptian superstition, which held these sacred, and worshipped their goddess Isis under this form; and this appears the more likely, because males only were chosen for sacrifice. So Herodotus says, they sacrifice males, both old and young; but it is not lawful for them to offer females.
2. It was to be a red heifer, because the Egyptians sacrificed red bulls to the evil demon Typhon.
3. It was to be without spot, having no mixture of any other colour. Plutarch says, the Egyptians “sacrifice red bulls, and select them with such scrupulous attention, that if the animal has a single black or white hair, they reckon it , unfit to be sacrificed.”
4. Without blemish. – See note on Lev 22:21.
5. On which never came yoke: because an animal which had been used for a common purpose was deemed improper for sacrifice. Num 19:6, Lev 14:6, Isa 1:18, Rev 1:5
no blemish: Exo 12:5, Lev 22:20-25, Mal 1:13, Mal 1:14, Luk 1:35, Heb 7:26, 1Pe 1:19, 1Pe 2:22
upon which: Deu 21:3, 1Sa 6:7, Lam 1:14, Joh 10:17, Joh 10:18, Phi 2:6-8
Reciprocal: Num 5:17 – holy water Neh 12:30 – themselves Heb 9:13 – and Heb 9:14 – without
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Num 19:2. This is the law which the Lord hath commanded Or rather, had commanded. For it is probable that the water of purification had been made before, although the manner of making it is here first described. That they bring thee a red heifer Provided at the expense of the congregation, because they were all to have a joint interest in it; as all believers, the spiritual Israel, have in Christ, typified by it. Here a question arises, why this sacrifice (if it may be so called) must be a heifer, when in other cases bullocks are appointed, and, in general, the male is preferred to the female. According to St. Austin and Theodoret, the weaker sex was to signify that infirmity of the flesh wherewith Christ was clothed. But the reason which Dr. Spencer assigns seems to be more plausible, which is, that it was in opposition to the Egyptian superstition. For though the Egyptians offered bullocks in sacrifice, they had cows in great veneration; as Herodotus, Diodorus Siculus, lian, Porphyry, and others, unanimously declare. Porphyry says they would rather have eaten human flesh than that of cows. In order, therefore, to expose this folly of Egypt in the eyes of the Israelites, God directs Moses to appoint one solemn institution wherein a heifer was to be the victim. A red heifer A fit colour to shadow forth the nature of sin, and the blood of Christ, from which this water and all other rites had their purifying virtue. The Jews say, that it was necessary the heifer should be entirely red, without the least mixture of any other colour, and that if but two hairs were black or white it was unfit for this sacrifice. Without spot Hebrew, , temima, perfect; wherein is no blemish Thus typifying the spotless purity and sinless perfection of the Lord Jesus. Upon which never came yoke This was not necessary in other sacrifices; but may here be considered as signifying the perfect freedom of the Lord Jesus from every obligation to undertake our cause and die in our stead, save that which love laid him under. For when he said, Lo, I come, he was bound by no other cords than those of his great love to us.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
19:2 {a} This [is] the ordinance of the law which the LORD hath commanded, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring thee a red heifer without spot, wherein [is] no blemish, [and] upon which never came yoke:
(a) According to this law and ceremony you shall sacrifice the red cow.