Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 6:16
And the remainder thereof shall Aaron and his sons eat: with unleavened bread shall it be eaten in the holy place; in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation they shall eat it.
The males only might eat these, because they were most holy things; whereas the daughters of Aaron might eat other holy things, Num 18:11.
With unleavened bread; or rather, unleavened, for with is not in the Hebrew, and it disturbs the sense; for since the meat-offering itself was fine flour, Lev 2:1, it is not likely that they eat it with unleavened bread.
In the court of the tabernacle of the congregation; in some special room appointed for that purpose. See Lev 8:31; 1Sa 3:3; Eze 42:13; 46:19,24. The reason why this was to be eaten only by holy persons, and that in a holy place, is given Lev 6:17, because it is most holy, and therefore to be treated with greater reverence.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And the remainder thereof shall Aaron and his sons eat,…. What quantity of fine flour the meat offering consisted of is not said; very probably it was left to the offerer to bring what he would, since it was a freewill offering:
[with] unleavened [bread] shall it be eaten in the holy place; or rather, “unleavened shall it be eaten”; for it cannot well be thought that bread of any sort should be eaten with this offering, which, properly speaking, was itself a bread offering, and so it should be called, rather than a meat offering; and certain it is, that no meat offering was to be made of leaven, but of fine flour unleavened, and so to be eaten, not by the priests in their own houses, but in the tabernacle; not in that part of it properly called the holy place, in distinction from the holy of holies, but as it follows:
in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation they shall eat it; in a room provided in that court for that purpose, as afterwards in the temple.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
16. And the remainder thereof. He repeats what we have seen just before, that the residue of those oblations, in which there was peculiar holiness, should belong to the priests; but upon condition that they should be eaten nowhere except in the sanctuary. A special precept is also given as to the minha, (meat-offering,) that it should not be made into leavened bread; for thus the meal, which had been already dedicated to God, would be changed into common food, which could not be done without profanation. Since, then, God admits the priests, as it were, to His own table, the dignity of their office is not a little heightened by this privilege; yet in such a manner as that by their liberty the reverence due to God’s service may not be impaired. Afterwards Moses confirms in general terms that right, which had been before assigned to them, that they should take what remained of the burnt-offerings, on condition that it should be eaten by males only, and in the sacred place; in order that God’s presence may not only act as a restraint on their luxury and intemperance, but, also instruct them in the sobriety due from His servants, and, in a word, accustom them to exceeding purity, whilst they reflect that they are separated from all others. At the end of Lev 6:18, some translate it in the neuter gender, “every thing that shall have touched them shall be holy:” but in this passage Moses seems to me to prescribe that none but the priests should touch the minha. It was said elsewhere of the altar and its vessels, that by virtue of their anointing they sanctified whatever was placed upon them; but we now see that ordinary men are prohibited from touching sacred things, that their sanctity may be inviolate. For we know that the sons of Aaron were anointed with this object, that they alone might be allowed to touch whatever was consecrated to God. Therefore the verb in the future tense is put for the imperative. So also it is soon afterwards said of the victims, Lev 6:27, “Whosoever shall touch the flesh thereof shall be holy:” (212) because Moses enacts this special law for the priests, that they alone should handle the sacrifices. Nor does what immediately follows contradict this, “when there is sprinkled of the blood thereof on any garment,” etc.; for he does not mean to say that the garments or any vessels would be consecrated by the mere touch; but it is an argument from the less to the greater; if it were not lawful to take a garment sprinkled with the blood, or the pots in which the flesh was dressed, out of the tabernacle, unless the garment were washed, or the pots broken or rinsed, much more were they to beware lest any of the ordinary people should meddle with it. For how shall a mortal man dare to lay a hand upon that holy thing ( sanctitati) which could not even cleave to the garment; of a priest without atonement? The sum is that a thing so holy should not be mixed with unhallowed things.
(212) A. V., “Whatsoever,” following the V. and not LXX.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(16) With unleavened bread shall it be eaten.Better, unleavened shall it be eaten. That is, the remainder of the meal is to be made into unleavened cakes, and thus be eaten. (See Lev. 10:12.) By adding the word with, which is not in the original, the Authorised Version says that the priests are to eat the meat offering with the addition of unleavened cakes.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
16. The remainder shall Aaron and his sons eat The reason of this requirement is “because it is most holy.” For a discussion of the question whether the priests were able to eat all the most holy things commanded them, see Concluding Note, chap. 7.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Lev 6:16. With unleavened bread shall it be eaten Unleavened shall it be eaten. Houbigant. There is nothing for with in the original.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Lev 6:16 And the remainder thereof shall Aaron and his sons eat: with unleavened bread shall it be eaten in the holy place; in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation they shall eat it.
Ver. 16. Shall Aaron and his sons eat. ] See 1Co 9:13-14 . See Trapp on “ 1Co 9:13 “ See Trapp on “ 1Co 9:14 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
with unleavened bread shall it be eaten. Hebrew “unleavened shall it be eaten”; there is no “with” in the Hebrew Compare Lev 10:12.
holy. See note on Exo 3:5.
tabernacle = tent. Hebrew. ‘ohel. App-40.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
the remainder: Lev 2:3, Lev 2:10, Lev 5:13, Eze 44:29, 1Co 9:13-15
unleavened: Exo 12:8, 1Co 5:8
shall it: Lev 6:26, Lev 10:12, Lev 10:13, Num 18:9, Num 18:10
Reciprocal: Lev 6:23 – it shall not be Lev 7:6 – male Lev 7:9 – shall be Lev 7:12 – unleavened wafers Lev 7:31 – the breast Lev 21:22 – both Lev 24:9 – they shall Num 18:8 – the charge Num 18:20 – General 1Sa 2:28 – did I give 2Ch 31:14 – the most Eze 40:14 – the court
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Lev 6:16. The remainder shall Aaron and his sons eat Unless they had some legal uncleanness upon them, Lev 22:6. His sons The males only might eat these, because they were most holy things; whereas the daughters of Aaron might eat other holy things. In the court In some special room appointed for that purpose. The reason why this was to be eaten only by holy persons, and that in a holy place, is given, (Lev 6:17,) because it is most holy.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
THE PRIESTS PORTIONS
Lev 6:16-18; Lev 7:6-10; Lev 7:14; Lev 7:31-36
AFTER the law of the guilt offering follows a section {Lev 6:8-30; Lev 7:1-38} with regard to the offerings previously treated, but addressed especially to the priests, as the foregoing were specially directed to the people. Much of the contents of this section has already passed before us, in anticipation of its order in the book, as this has seemed necessary in order to a complete exposition of the several offerings. An important part of the section, however, relating to the portion of the offerings which was appointed for the priests, has been passed by until now, and must claim our brief attention.
In the verses indicated above, it is ordered that of the meal offerings, the sin offerings, and the guilt offerings, all that was not burnt, as also the wave breast and the heave shoulder of the peace offerings, should be for Aaron and his sons. In particular, it is directed that the priests portion of the sin offering and the guilt offering shall be eaten by “the priest that maketh atonement therewith”; {Lev 7:7} and that of the meal offerings prepared in the oven, the frying pan, or the baking pan, all that is not burned upon the altar, according to the law of chapter 2, shall be eaten by “the priest that offereth it”; and that of every meal offering mingled with oil, or dry, the same part “shall all the sons of Aaron have, one as well as another”. {Lev 7:9-10} Of the burnt offering, all the flesh being burned, the hide alone fell to the officiating priest as his perquisite. {Lev 7:8}
These regulations are explained in the concluding verses of the section Lev 7:35-36 as follows, “This is the anointing portion of Aaron, and the anointing portion of his sons, out of the offerings of the Lord made by fire, in the day when he presented them to minister unto the Lord in the priests office; which the Lord commanded to be given them of the children of Israel, in the day that he anointed them. It is a due forever throughout their generations.”
Hence, it is plain that this use which was to be made of certain parts of certain offerings does not touch the question of the consecration of the whole to God. The whole of each offering is none the less wholly accepted and appropriated by God, that He designates a part of it to the maintenance of the priesthood. That even as thus used by the priest it is used by him as something belonging to God, is indicated by the phrase used, “it is most”; {Lev 6:17} expressive words, which in the law of the offerings always have a technical use, as denoting those things of which only the sons of Aaron might partake, and that only in the holy place. In the case of the meal offering, its peculiarly sacred character as belonging, the whole of it, exclusively to God, is further marked by the additional injunctions that it, should be eaten without leaven in a holy place; {Lev 6:16} and that whosoever touched these offerings should be; {Lev 6:18} that is, he should be as a man separated to God, under all the restrictions (doubtless, without the privileges), which belonged to the priesthood, as men set apart for Gods service. In the eating of their portion of the various offerings by the priests, we are to recognise no official act: we simply see the servants of God supported by the bread of His table.
This last thought, which is absent in the case of no one of the offerings, is brought out with special clearness and fulness in the ceremonial connected with the peace offerings. {Lev 7:28-34} In this case, certain parts, the right thigh (or shoulder?) and the breast, are set apart as the due of the priest. The selection of these is determined by the principle which marks all the Levitical legislation: God and those who represent Him are to be honoured by the consecration of the best of everything. In the animals used upon the altar, these were regarded as the choice parts, and are indeed referred to as such in other Scriptures. But, in order that neither the priest nor the people may imagine that the priest receives these as a man from his fellowmen, but may understand that they are given to God, and that it is from God that the priest now receives them, as His servant, fed from His table; to this end, certain ceremonies were ordained to be used with these parts; the breast was to be “heaved,” the thigh was to be “waved,” before the Lord. What was the meaning of these actions?
The breast was to be “heaved”; that is, elevated heavenward. The symbolic meaning of this act can scarcely be missed. By it, the priest acknowledged his dependence upon God for the supply of this sacrificial food, and, again, by this act consecrated it anew to Him as the One that sitteth in the heavens.
But God is not only the One that “sitteth in the heavens”; He is the God who has condescended also to dwell among men, and especially in the tent of meeting in the midst of Israel. And thus, as by the elevation of the breast heavenward, God, the Giver, was recognised as the One enthroned in heaven, so by the “waving” of the thigh, which, as the rabbis tell us, was a movement backward and forward, to and from the altar, He was recognised also as Jehovah, who had condescended from heaven to dwell in the midst of His people. Like the “heaving,” so the “waving,” then, was an act of acknowledgment and consecration to God; the former, to God, as in heaven, the God of creation; the other, to God, as the God of the altar, the God of redemption. And that this is the true significance of these acts is illustrated by the fact that in the Pentateuch, in the account of the gold and silver brought by the people for the preparation of the tabernacle, {Exo 35:22} the same word is used to describe the presentation of these offerings which is here used of the wave offering.
And so in the peace offering the principle is amply illustrated upon which the priests received their dues. The worshippers bring their offerings, and present them, not to the priest, but through him to God; who, then, having used such parts as He will in the service of the sanctuary, gives again such parts of them as He pleases to the priests.
The lesson of these arrangements lies immediately before us. They were intended to teach Israel, and, according to the New Testament, are also designed to teach us, that it is the will of God that those who give up secular occupations to devote themselves to the ministry of His house should be supported by the freewill offerings of Gods people. Very strange indeed it is to hear a few small sects in our day denying this. For the Apostle Paul argues at length to this effect, and calls the attention of the Corinthians {1Co 9:13-14} to the fact that the principle expressed in this ordinance of the law of Moses has not been set aside, but holds good in this dispensation. “Know ye not that they which wait upon the altar have their portion with the altar? Even so did the Lord ordain that they which proclaim the Gospel should live of the Gospel.” The principle plainly covers the case of all such as give up secular callings to devote themselves to the ministry of the Word, whether to proclaim the Gospel in any of the great mission fields, or to exercise the pastorate of the local church. Such are ever to be supported out of the consecrated offerings of Gods people. To point in disparagement of modern “hireling” ministers and missionaries, as some have done, to the case of Paul, who laboured with his own hands, that he might not be chargeable to those to whom he ministered, is singularly inapt, seeing that in the chapter above referred to he expressly vindicates his right to receive of the Corinthians his support, and in this Second Epistle to them even seems to express a doubt {2Co 12:13} whether in refusing, as he did, to receive support from them, he had not done them a “wrong,” making them thus “inferior to the rest of the churches,” from whom, in fact, he did receive such material aid. {Php 4:10; Php 4:16} And if ever claims of this kind upon our benevolence and liberality seem to be heavy, and if to nature the burden is sometimes irksome, we shall do well to remember that the requirement is not of man, and not of the Church, but of God. It comes to us with the double authority of the Old and New Testament, of the Law and the Gospel. And it will certainly help us all to give to these ends the more gladly, if we keep that in mind which the Levitical law so carefully kept before Israel, that the giving was to be regarded by them as not to the priesthood, but to the Lord, and that in our giving outwardly to support the ministry of Gods Word, we give, really, to the Lord Himself. And it stands written: {Mat 10:42} “Whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only he shall in no wise lose his reward.”