Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Haggai 2:12
If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat, shall it be holy? And the priests answered and said, No.
12. If one bear ] Lit. Lo! one bears. “See, there is a man bearing what will happen?” An emphatic Oriental way of saying, “suppose, put the case, that one bears.” So in Jer 3:1 we have, “Lo! a man puts away his wife.” And in 2Ch 7:13, where “if” occurs three times in A. V. the Hebrew has “lo” the first and second time, and “if” the third time.
holy flesh ] i.e. flesh which has been offered in sacrifice to God. Comp. Jer 11:15.
the skirt ] Lit. the wing. So , are used for the skirts or flaps of a cloak or dress.
meat ] i.e. food, or eatables. LXX. .
the priests answered and said, No ] In Lev 6:27 we read of the sin-offering, “Whatsoever shall touch the flesh thereof shall be holy.” The garment therefore in which the flesh was carried would be holy, but the holiness would not extend, so the priests ruled it, to anything which the garment touched.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
If one, any one, bear, carry away from the altar, or the priests hands,
holy flesh, part of the sacrifice, legally and ceremonially sanctified, or made holy by the altar on which the whole was sanctified, of which a part is supposed to be carried away
in the skirt of his garment, in the lap of his garment, or in any other cloth or napkin, and this cloth touch any common thing,
as bread, & c., shall that common thing by such contact become legally or ceremonially holy?
The priests answered: who these priests were is not mentioned, but it is likely that there were some among the people who did by the prophets persuasion go and propose the case, and they received the answer as here in the negative, for neither mediate nor yet immediate touch of holy things could make common things or unholy persons holy.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
12. “Holy flesh” (thatis, the flesh of a sacrifice, Jer11:15), indeed, makes holy the “skirt” in which it iscarried; but that “skirt” cannot impart its sanctity to anything beyond, as “bread,” &c. (Le6:27). This is cited to illustrate the principle, that asacrifice, holy, as enveloping divine things (just as the “skirt”is “holy” which envelops “holy” flesh), cannot byits inherent or opus operatum efficacy make holy a personwhose disobedience, as that of the Jew while neglecting God’s house,made him unholy.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment,…. Or, “carry” it q; from one place to another in his pockets or bags, which were in the skirts of his garments. This is to be understood of the flesh of creatures offered in sacrifice, which were sanctified or separated for holy use; part of which belonged to the priests, who might carry it in their pockets to the proper place of eating it:
and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat: which were not holy, and not separated for holy use, but were common meats and drinks: now the question upon this is,
shall it be holy? that is, if either of those common things were touched by the skirt, in the pockets of which the holy flesh were carried, whether they were made holy by such a touch, and no more remained common or profane?
and the priests answered and said, No; they were not sanctified; for though the garment itself was sanctified thereby, and might not be employed in common use till washed, Le 6:27 yet a garment so touched could not convey holiness to whatsoever that touched, or that touched it.
q “portaverit”, Munster; “portet”, Varenius, Reinbeck.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
(12) Holy flesh.The flesh of the sacrifice hallowed the person who touched it (Lev. 6:27), but this sanctification was not conveyed to anything he might afterwards touch. On the other hand (Hag. 2:13), he who was defiled by such a pollution as contact with a dead body, conveyed defilement even to the tabernacle. (See Num. 19:13 : Whosoever toucheth the dead body of any man that is dead, and purifieth not himself, defileth the tabernacle of the Lord.) Even so, according to Haggai, the guilt of impiety incurred by the Jews in neglecting the Temple had tainted the labour of their hands, and caused famine. And what merit they might claim for restoring the altar-worship and keeping the prescribed feasts (Ezr. 3:2-6) was not conveyed further. It was cancelled by their neglect of an equally important duty. This latter point, however, is not brought out, but is left to be supplied by the prophets hearers.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
12, 13. Two questions are propounded to the priests: (1) Whether or not a garment made holy through contact with holy flesh (compare Lev 6:27) transmits this holiness to other articles which might come in contact with it.
Holy flesh Flesh of an animal slain for sacrificial purposes (Jer 11:15).
Skirt Literally, wing. A corner of the large outer garment (see on Amo 2:8) could be turned in so as to form a convenient place in which to carry articles of various kinds. The articles named are common articles of food. The specific case laid before the priests is not provided for in the ceremonial law. To this question the priests give a negative answer. (2) When one who is made unclean by contact with something that is unclean touches the same articles of food, do they become unclean? In this case the answer is in the affirmative, in accordance with Num 19:22.
Unclean by a dead body By coming in contact with a dead body (compare Num 9:10; Lev 21:11). This was the most dreaded kind of uncleanness.
In Hag 2:14 the prophet applies the priestly decisions to the case of the people.
So Refers to the substance of the priestly decisions, more especially to the second.
This people The people gathered about him (see on Hag 1:2).
Before me In my estimate.
Every work of their hands Their life and conduct permeated with selfishness (Hag 1:4).
That which they offer All their offerings and sacrifices.
There Upon the altar mentioned in Ezr 3:3; near it the prophet probably stood when he delivered the address. All the offerings offered there are an abomination to Jehovah. Why? The answer must be supplied from the context. The people offering sacrifice are like the man carrying the holy flesh; but in neglecting Jehovah and looking only after their own interests they are like the man made unclean through contact with an unclean body. Since the powers of infection of an unclean thing are greater than those of a clean thing, their unclean conduct exerts greater influence than their clean sacrifices and makes unclean their otherwise clean offerings. Haggai does not carry the application further; by implication, however, his words contain an exhortation to change their conduct; in this case, to carry on more earnestly the building operations. After Hag 2:14, LXX. has a lengthy addition which is, however, in all probability, not an original part of the prophecy.
In Hag 2:15-19 the prophet refers once more to the calamities present and past and urges the people to bear in mind that they are the direct result of their indifference, and that any change in their condition depends entirely upon their zeal in building the temple.
And now Perhaps better, but now. These words are really the introduction to Hag 2:18. A change in their conduct has already begun, hence he may place by the side of the warning in Hag 2:14 a message of commendation and promise. Before he utters the latter he refers once more to the past calamity, so as to bring out more strongly the contrast between the calamity of the past and the prosperity of the future.
Consider As in Hag 1:5-7.
From this day and upward R.V., “backward.” The R.V. translation has no support (compare 1Sa 16:13); the word points to the future. The mistranslation is due to a misinterpretation of the entire verse. The meaning becomes clear if a stop is made after upward; “Consider from this day and upward!” that is, consider or bear in mind continually, from this moment on, what I am about to say: on the one hand, that your past neglectfulness brought disaster (15-17); on the other, that zeal and faithfulness will bring prosperity (18, 19).
After this summons to consider, a new beginning should be made: “Before a stone was laid upon a stone in the temple of Jehovah; since those days were, (it happened that) when one came. “
Before a stone was laid Before building operations were commenced.
Since those days were R.V., “Through all that time.” An obscure expression. The reading of R.V. gives good enough sense, though the words seem superfluous after 15a, but the Hebrew hardly warrants the translation. LXX. reads, “who were ye,” which may represent an original “how were ye.” These might be the closing words of a question which has its beginning in Hag 2:15, “Before a stone was laid upon a stone in the temple of Jehovah, how did ye fare?” The temporal clause is placed first, because the emphasis rests upon it.
How they did fare is stated in the rest of Hag 2:16 and in Hag 2:17. The thought is similar to that expressed in Hag 1:6; Hag 1:9-11; disappointment and disaster on every hand.
Heap of twenty That is, a heap of sheaves estimated to give twenty measures; but when it was threshed it yielded ten, only one half of what was expected.
Pressfat R.V., “winevat.” The receptacle in which wine juice is kept after the grapes are pressed out. The grapes, instead of yielding fifty measures of wine, yielded only twenty.
Out of the press Omitted in R.V. The noun occurs elsewhere in the sense of winepress (so A.V.; compare Isa 63:3). Some think that it is used in the more general sense of measure (so R.V.), or that it is the name of a measure, equivalent to bath (Isa 5:10), which is of the same size as the ephah (see on Amo 8:5). This is not likely. If the text is correct the translation of A.V. is to be preferred; otherwise the word must be omitted as an explanatory gloss to the preceding “winevat.”
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Hag 2:12 If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat, shall it be holy? And the priests answered and said, No.
Ver. 12. If one bear holy flesh in the skirt, &c. ] Problems and parables are notable helps to the bolting out of the truth, and conviction of the gainsayers. For problems see Mat 13:10-15 ; Mat 21:25 ; Mat 22:42 . For parables see Jdg 9:7-15 , that of Jotham, of Nathan, 2Sa 12:1-4 , of the woman of Tekoah, 2Sa 14:5-7 , of our Saviour concerning the two brethren sent into the vineyard, the wedding of the king’s son, the sower. See Trapp on “ Hag 2:10 “
And the priests answered and said, No
a Antiq. An official expounder of sacred mysteries or religious ceremonies, esp. in ancient Greece; an initiating or presiding priest. D
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
holy. See note on Exo 3:5.
holy flesh: i.e. the flesh of a sacrifice. Compare Jer 11:15.
skirt = wing. See note on Rth 3:9.
or. Note the Figure of speech Paradiastole (App-6).
wine. Hebrew. yayin. App-27.
shall = will.
holy. See note on Ex”. Hag 3:5.
No. Reference to Pentateuch (Lev 6:27). App-92.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
holy flesh (See Scofield “Jer 11:15”) .
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Exo 29:37, Lev 6:27, Lev 6:29, Lev 7:6, Eze 44:19, Mat 23:19
Reciprocal: Lev 6:18 – every one Jer 11:15 – the holy
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Hag 2:12, Holy flesh means that kind that had been selected and prepared tor tbe altar according to the demands of the law. But whIle holding that flesh in bis skirt before reaching the altar he comes in contact with these other articles that had n ot been con- secrated. The priests admitted that it would render that flesh unholy.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
2:12 If one bear {g} holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat, shall it be holy? And the priests answered and said, No.
(g) That is, the flesh of the sacrifices, by which he means that a thing which of itself is good, cannot make another thing so: and therefore they ought not to justify themselves by their sacrifices and ceremonies: but contrary to this, he that is unclean and not pure of heart, does corrupt those things and make them detestable to God, which otherwise are good and godly.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The question was, if someone carries consecrated food in his garment and touches other food of any kind with the garment, will that food become holy? Holy meat was meat set apart for a particular sacrificial purpose (cf. Lev 6:25; Num 6:20). The answer was, no it would not become holy. The meat carried in the garment would make the garment holy, but the holiness would not be communicated beyond the garment to anything else (cf. Exo 29:37; Lev 6:27; Eze 44:19; Mat 23:19). The people were apparently thinking that since they were working on the holy temple all that they contacted and did became holy. Another view is that the Lord sought to discourage His people from taking gifts from pagan rulers and using them to build the temple (cf. Ezr 6:8-10). [Note: See Merrill, pp. 45-46, 49.]