Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 22:25
Neither from a stranger’s hand shall ye offer the bread of your God of any of these; because their corruption [is] in them, [and] blemishes [be] in them: they shall not be accepted for you.
25. The case apparently is that of a foreigner who desires to offer sacrifice, and is forbidden to present an animal with a blemish. So Dillm. It is much less probable that the prohibition is directed against an Israelite buying blemished animals from a foreigner for a sacrificial purpose.
the bread of your God ] See on Lev 22:6.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
A strangers hand – The word here rendered stranger, is not the same as that in Lev 22:10, Lev 22:18 : it means literally, the son of the unknown, and probably refers to one dwelling in another land who desired to show respect to the God of Israel. See 1Ki 8:41.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 25. Their corruption is in them] Viz., they are bruised, crushed, broken, &c.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Neither from a strangers hand, to wit, from proselytes, from whom less might seem to be expected, and in whom God might bear with some things which he would not bear with in his own people; yet even from those such should not be accepted, much less from the Israelites.
The bread, i.e. the sacrifices. See on Lev 21:8. Of any of these, i.e. corrupted or defective; which clause limits the sense and kinds of offerings, and cuts off another more general interpretation received by many, to wit, that he forbids the receiving of any offering, whether blemished or perfect, from the hands of a stranger remaining in heathenism.
Their corruption is in them, i.e. they are corrupt, vicious, and unlawful sacrifices. For you, or, from you, O priests, to whom it belongs to offer. You shall bear the blame of it, for the strangers might do so through ignorance of Gods law.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Neither from a stranger’s hand shall ye offer the bread of your God of any of these,…. That is, from a Gentile, a proselyte of the gate, who had renounced idolatry, and was willing to offer sacrifice to the true God; but what had such defects and blemishes in them as before described the priest might not take of his hands, and offer on the altar of God; and this is the rather observed, because on the one hand the Gentile might think such sacrifices would be acceptable, since he might have been used to offer such to idols; and on the other hand, the priest might think such would do well enough for Gentiles, though not for Israelites:
because their corruption [is] in them; or they are corrupt through being bruised, crushed, broken, or cut:
[and] blemishes [be] in them; which seems to be added to explain the former, and may have respect to all the blemishes before named, and whatsoever is included in them; for though there are but here mentioned, the Jews reckon no less than fifty c:
they shall not be accepted for you; to make atonement for you; Jarchi says, or “from you”, the priests; they shall not be accepted of the Lord from their hands, and so be of no avail to the offerers, nor to those for whom they are offered.
c Maimon. Hilchot Biath Hamikdash, c. 7. sect. 1, &c.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Again, the Israelites were not to accept any one of all these, i.e., the faulty animals described, as sacrifice from a foreigner. “ For their corruption is in them, ” i.e., something corrupt, a fault, adheres to them; so that such offerings could not procure good pleasure towards them. – In Lev 22:26-30 three laws are given of a similar character.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
25. Neither from a stranger’s hand. God here forbids that victims of this sort should be offered to Him, although they might be purchased from foreigners. The Hebrews, however, has invented a different meaning, viz., that not even from foreigners were such sacrifices to be received, as it was unlawful for the children of the Church themselves to offer. But inasmuch as the Law altogether prohibited the unclean nations from making sacred oblations, another solution of this difficulty was still to be discovered. (295) They suppose, therefore, that those are called “strangers,” who observe the precepts of the children of Noah, i.e., who honor God, and do not pollute themselves by incest, abstain from the effusion of human blood, and from theft, and who do not worship idols. But the context does not accord with this, for Moses adds at the end that this kind of sacrifice would not be accepted by God from the Jews themselves, which will not agree with their being offered by the Gentiles. This, then, seems to me to be a confirmation of the previous injunction, introduced by way of precaution; for it might have seemed that the offering would have been permissible, if they had purchased the animal, even though it were defective; whereas God declares that what they were not allowed to present from their own stalls, was no more approved of by Him, if it had been purchased, because defectiveness is always displeasing to Him. Nor do I restrict this, as they do, to the foregoing clause, as if it only referred to castrated animals, and such as were wounded in the testicles, but I include with it also warts and eruptions, and other blemishes. In order that the prohibition may have more weight, he again calls the sacrifices “ the bread of God,” not because God, who is the fountain of life, has need of food, or eats of corruptible meat, since He is the eternal Spirit; but that men may more diligently take care duly to perform their sacred rites, wherein they familiarly draw nigh to God. Now, if no one would dare to present stale or corrupted food to an earthly prince, much less tolerable is it to contaminate God’s table with anything blemished.
(295) This is S.M.’s solution; and after him Fonseca. Willet. “ Some understand this (says Bonar) as forbidding them to let a stranger supply them with animals for sacrifices, q. d., take it not out of a stranger’s flock or herd: But this is contrary to practice approved of in after days; as when Cyrus gave, and Darius ordered others to supply. But the true meaning is evidently that the same rule shall hold in regard to a strangers offering as in regard to their own. ‘The stranger’ may be a proselyte, as Lev 22:18; or he may be such an one as Cyrus.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(25) Neither from a strangers hand shall ye offer.That is, the prohibition to sacrifice these animals is not restricted to beasts castrated in the land, but extends to all such as have been so treated out of the land, and are imported and sold to the Israelites by the hands of foreigners.
Because their corruption is in them.That is, their mutilation is in them, though not effected by an Israelite nor in the land. The circumstance that such an animal is purchased from the hand of a foreigner does not alter the case.
They shall not be accepted for you.That is, if the Israelites bring such mutilated sacrifices, thinking that, because they have been procured from a strangers hand, they do not transgress the law laid down in the preceding verse, they will not be accepted by God, who regards them as blemished and illegal. Jewish canonists, however, regard this verse as regulating the sacrifices offered by Gentiles, and maintain that the same law about defective animals is here laid down in their case. But the manifest contrast between the expression, when the deed is done in your land, at the end of the preceding verse, and the words from the hand of a foreigner, at the beginning of this verse; and more especially the declaration in the clause before us, they shall not be acceptable for you, i.e., the Israelites, show beyond doubt that the Israelites themselves are here spoken of as the offerers.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Lev 22:25. The bread of your God Or, The food of your God, i.e. Sacrifices. [Because their corruption is in them,blemishes be in them.] As in the original of these words we find no connective particle, blemishes may be either understood as explanatory of corruption; [corruption, i.e. blemishes be in them;] or, the two words may be considered as distinct: the former expressing the ill habit of body specified above; the latter the external defects of the body. Most of the versions countenance the first exposition.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Lev 22:25 Neither from a stranger’s hand shall ye offer the bread of your God of any of these; because their corruption [is] in them, [and] blemishes [be] in them: they shall not be accepted for you.
Ver. 25. Their corruption is in them. ] As not having their hearts purified by faith; and therefore not in case to please God.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
bread = food. Figure of speech Synecdoche (of Species), put for all kinds of food. App-6.
of. Genitive of relation. App-17.
God. Hebrew. Elohim. App-4.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
a stranger’s: Num 15:14-16, Num 16:40, Ezr 6:8-10
the bread: Lev 21:6, Lev 21:8, Lev 21:21, Lev 21:22, Mal 1:7, Mal 1:8, Mal 1:12-14
because: Eph 2:12, 1Jo 5:18
Reciprocal: Lev 3:11 – the food Lev 7:18 – it shall Lev 19:7 – it shall Lev 22:20 – General Lev 22:27 – seven days Num 9:14 – General Eze 44:7 – ye have brought
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Lev 22:25. Neither from a strangers hand From proselytes: even from those, such should not be accepted, much less from the Israelites. The bread of your God That is, the sacrifices.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
22:25 Neither {i} from a stranger’s hand shall ye offer the bread of your God of any of these; because their corruption [is] in them, [and] blemishes [be] in them: they shall not be accepted for you.
(i) You shall not receive any imperfect thing from a stranger, to make it the Lord’s offering: which he calls the bread of the Lord.