19<\/strong>. and of goats<\/em> ] This is not specially mentioned, but it may be supposed that “goats” were among the burnt-offerings mentioned in Exo 24:5<\/span>.<\/p>\n water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop<\/em> ] These again are not mentioned in Exo 24:6<\/span>, but are perhaps added from tradition on the analogy of Exo 12:22<\/span>; Num 19:6<\/span>; and Lev 14:4-6<\/span>.<\/p>\n hyssop<\/em> ] the dry stalks of a plant resembling marjoram.<\/p>\n both the book<\/em> ] See Exo 24:6-8<\/span>, where however it is not specially mentioned that the Book was sprinkled. The Jewish tradition was that it lay upon the altar (see Exo 24:7<\/span>). The “book” seems to have been the written record of what was uttered to Moses in Exo 20:22<\/span> to Exo 23:33<\/span>. This is one of several instances in which the writer shews himself learned in the Jewish legends ( Hagadoth<\/em>).<\/p>\n For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people – <\/B>When he had recited all the Law, and had given all the commandments entrusted him to deliver; Exo 24:3<\/span>.<\/P> He took the blood of calves and of goats – <\/B>This passage has given great perplexity to commentators from the fact that Moses in his account of the transactions connected with the ratification of the covenant with the people, Exo. 24<\/span>, mentions only a part of the circumstances here referred to. He says nothing of the blood of calves and of goats; nothing of water, and scarletwool, and hyssop; nothing of sprinkling the book, the tabernacle, or the vessels of the ministry. It has been made a question, therefore, whence Paul obtained a knowledge of these circumstances? Since the account is not contained in the Old Testament, it must have been either by tradition, or by direct inspiration. The latter supposition is hardly probable, because:<\/P> (1) The information here can hardly be regarded as of sufficient importance to have required an original revelation; for the illustration would have had sufficient force to sustain his conclusion if the literal account in Exodus only had been given, that Moses sprinkled the people, but<\/P> (2) Such an original act of inspiration here would not have been consistent with the object of the apostle. In that argument it was essential that he should state only the facts about the ancient dispensation which were admitted by the Hebrews themselves. Any statement of his own about things which they did not concede to be true, or which was not well understood as a custom, might have been called in question, and would have done much to invalidate the entire force of the argument. It is to be presumed, therefore, that the facts here referred to had been preserved by tradition; and in regard to this, and the authority due to such a tradition, we may remark:<\/P> (1)That it is well known that the Jews had a great number of traditions which they carefully preserved;<\/P> (2)That there is no improbability in the supposition that many events in their history would be preserved in this manner, since in the small compass of a volume like the Old Testament it cannot be presumed that all the events of their nation had been recorded;<\/P> (3)Though they had many traditions of a trifling nature, and many which were false (compare notes on Mat 15:2<\/span>), yet they doubtless had many that were true;<\/P> (4)In referring to those traditions, there is no impropriety in supposing that Paul may have been guided by the Spirit of inspiration in selecting only those which were true; and,<\/P> (5)Nothing is more probable than what is here stated. If Moses sprinkled the people; if he read the book of the law then Exo 24:7<\/span>, and if this was regarded as a solemn act of ratifying a covenant with God, nothing would be more natural than that he should sprinkle the book of the covenant, and even the tabernacle and its various sacred utensils.<\/P> We are to remember also, that it was common among the Hebrews to sprinkle blood for the purpose of consecrating, or as an emblem of purifying. Thus, Aaron and his sons and their garments were sprinkled with blood when they were consecrated to the office of priests, Exo 29:19-21<\/span>; the blood of sacrifices was sprinkled on the altar, Lev 1:5<\/span>, Lev 1:11<\/span>; Lev 3:2<\/span>, Lev 3:13<\/span>; and blood was sprinkled before the veil of the sanctuary, Lev 4:10<\/span>, Lev 4:17<\/span>; compare Lev 6:27<\/span>; Lev 7:14<\/span>. So Josephus speaks of the garments of Aaron and of his sons being sprinkled with the blood of the slain beasts, and with spring water. Having consecrated them and their garments, he says, for seven days together, he did the same to the tabernacle, and the vessels thereto belonging, both with oil and with the blood of bulls and of rams. Ant<\/I>. book iii, chapter 8, section 6. These circumstances show the strong probability of the truth of what is here affirmed by Paul, while it is impossible to prove that Moses did not sprinkle the book and the tabernacle in the manner stated. The mere omission by Moses cannot demonstrate that it was not done. On the phrase the blood of calves and of goats, see note on Heb 9:12<\/span>.<\/P> With water – <\/B>Agreeably to the declaration of Josephus that spring water was used. In Lev 14:49-51<\/span>, it is expressly mentioned that the blood of the bird that was killed to cleanse a house from the plague of leprosy should be shed over running water, and that the blood and the water should be sprinkled on the walls. It has been suggested also (see Bloomfield), that the use of water was necessary in order to prevent the blood from coagulating, or so as to make it possible to sprinkle it.<\/P> And scarlet wool – <\/B>Margin, Purple. The word used here denotes crimson, or deep-scarlet. The colour was obtained from a small insect which was found adhering to the shoots of a species of oak in Spain and in Western Asia, of about the size of a pea. It was regarded as the most valuable of the colours for dyeing, and was very expensive. Why the wool used by Moses was of this colour is not known, unless it be because it was the most expensive of colours, and thus accorded with everything employed in the construction of the tabernacle and its utensils. Wool appears to have been used in order to absorb and retain the blood.<\/P> And hyssop – <\/B>That is, a bunch of hyssop intermingled with the wool, or so connected with it as to constitute a convenient instrument for sprinkling; compare Lev 14:51<\/span>. Hyssop is a low shrub, regarded as one of the smallest of the plants, and hence, put in contrast with the cedar of Lebanon. It sprung out of the rocks or walls, 1Ki 4:33<\/span>, and was used for purposes of purification. The term seems to have comprised not only the common hyssop, but also lavender and other aromatic plants. Its fragrance, as well as its size, may have suggested the idea of using it in the sacred services of the tabernacle.<\/P> And sprinkled both the book – <\/B>This circumstance is not mentioned by Moses, but it has been shown above not to be improbable. Some expositors, however, in order to avoid the difficulty in the passage, have taken this in connection with the word <\/SPAN><\/span> labon – rendered he took – meaning taking the blood, and the book itself; but the more natural and proper construction is, that the book was sprinkled with the blood.<\/P> And all the people – <\/B>Moses says, and sprinkled it on the people; Exo 24:8<\/span>. We are not to suppose that either Moses or Paul designs to say that the blood was actually sprinkled on each one of the three millions of people in the wilderness, but the meaning doubtless is that the blood was sprinkled over the people, though in fact it might have fallen on a few. So a man now standing on an elevated place, and surrounded by a large assembly, if he should sprinkle water over them from the place where he stood, might be said to sprinkle it on the people, though in fact but few might have been touched by it. The act would be equally significant whether the emblem fell on few or many.<\/P> <\/p>\n Verse 19. When Moses had spoken every precept<\/B><\/I>] The place to which the apostle alludes is Ex 24:4-8<\/span>, where the reader is requested to consult the notes.<\/P> <\/P> And sprinkled both the book<\/B><\/I>] The sprinkling of the book<\/I> is not mentioned in the place to which the apostle refers, (see above,) nor did it in fact take place. The words , and<\/I> the book itself<\/I>, should be referred to , having taken<\/I>, and not to , he sprinkled<\/I>; the verse should therefore be read thus: For after every commandment of the law had been recited by<\/I> Moses to all the people, he took the blood of the calves, and of<\/I> the goats, with water and scarlet wool, and the book itself, and<\/I> sprinkled all the people<\/I>. The rite was performed thus: Having received the blood of the calves and goats into basins, and mingled it with water to prevent it from coagulating, he then took a bunch of hyssop<\/I>, and having bound it together with thread<\/I> made of scarlet wool<\/I>, he dipped this in the basin, and sprinkled the blood and water upon the people who were nearest to him, and who might be considered on this occasion the representatives of all the rest; for it is impossible that he should have had blood enough to have sprinkled the whole of the congregation.<\/P> <\/P> Some think that the blood was actually sprinkled upon the book<\/I> itself<\/I>, which contained the written covenant, to signify that the covenant itself was ratified by the blood.<\/P> <\/p>\n For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law: that the Old Testament was ratified by blood the Spirit proveth by instance, Moses as mediator having spoken every command, promise, and article of the covenant to all Israel, who came out of Egypt, according to Gods charge, reading all to them out of the book, wherein by Gods order he had written it; and the people declaring their assent and consent unto this covenant, as Exo 24:3<\/span>,4<\/span>,7<\/span>, as God covenanted and bound himself to his part of it. <\/P> He took the blood of calves, &c.: the Mediator then took, according to the common rite in such ratifying acts, a sprinkling bush made of scarlet wool, cedar wood, and hyssop, Lev 14:4<\/span>,6<\/span>; Num 19:6<\/span>,18<\/span>; to which David alludeth, Psa 51:7<\/span>; and with this bunch sprinkles the blood and water (which he had received into basons from the sacrifices, killed by the first-born, for burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, and there mixed, Exo 24:5<\/span>,6<\/span>; Le 9:3<\/span>,4<\/span>; 14:51<\/span>) on the altar, book of the covenant, and all Israel, Exo 24:6-8<\/span>, confirming and ratifying the covenant on Gods part and theirs, as the words annexed, Heb 9:20<\/span>, and Exo 24:8<\/span>, affirm: Behold the blood by which this covenant is made firm and inviolable. All this is but a shadow and type of the ratification of the new covenant with sinners by the death of Christ; he is the Mediator that brings Gods testamental covenant to them; he dieth and puts it in force; by his blood ratifieth it on Gods part and theirs, by his Spirit applying it to them, and sprinkling it on them; he brings home the testamental blessings to them, Heb 10:22<\/span>; 11:28<\/span>; 12:24<\/span>; Isa 52:15<\/span>; Eze 36:25<\/span>; 1Pe 1:2<\/span>. <\/P> <\/p>\n 19. For<\/B>confirming the generaltruth, Heb 9:16<\/span>. <\/P> spoken . . . according to thelaw<\/B>strictly adhering to every direction of “the law ofcommandments contained in ordinances” (Eph2:15<\/span>). Compare Ex 24:3<\/span>,”Moses told the people all the words of the Lord, and all thejudgments;<\/I> and all the people<\/I> answered with one voice,”c. <\/P> the blood of calves<\/B>Greek,<\/I>“the calves,” namely, those sacrificed by the “youngmen” whom he sent to do so (Ex24:5<\/span>). The “peace offerings” there mentioned were “ofoxen<\/I>” (Septuagint,<\/I> “little calves”), andthe “burnt offerings” were probably (though this is notspecified), as on the day of atonement, goats.<\/I> The law inExodus sanctioned formally many sacrificial practices in use bytradition, from the primitive revelation long before. <\/P> with water<\/B>prescribed,though not in the twenty-fourth chapter of Exodus, yet in otherpurifications for example, of the leper, and the water of separationwhich contained the ashes of the red heifer. <\/P> scarlet wool, andhyssop<\/B>ordinarily used for purification. Scarlet<\/I> orcrimson,<\/I> resembling blood: it was thought to be a peculiarlydeep, fast dye, whence it typified sin (see on Isa1:18<\/span>). So Jesus wore a scarlet robe, the emblem of the deep-dyedsins He bore on<\/I> Him, though He had none in<\/I> Him. Woolwas used as imbibing and retaining water; the hyssop, as a bushy,tufty plant (wrapt round with the scarlet wool), was used forsprinkling it. The wool was also a symbol of purity (Isa1:18<\/span>). The Hyssopus officinalis<\/I> grows on walls, with smalllancet-formed woolly leaves, an inch long, with blue and whiteflowers, and a knotty stalk about a foot high. <\/P> sprinkled . . . thebook<\/B>namely, out of which he had read “every precept”:the book of the testament or covenant. This sprinkling of the book isnot mentioned in the twenty-fourth chapter of Exodus. Hence BENGELtranslates, “And (having taken) the book itself (so Ex24:7<\/span>), he both sprinkled all the people, and (Heb9:21<\/span>) moreover sprinkled the tabernacle.” But the Greek<\/I>supports English Version.<\/I> Paul, by inspiration, supplies theparticular specified here, not in Ex24:7<\/span>. The sprinkling of the roll<\/I> (so the Greek<\/I> for”book”) of the covenant, or testament, as well as of thepeople, implies that neither can the law<\/I> be fulfilled, nor thepeople be purged from their sins, save by the sprinkling of the bloodof Christ (1Pe 1:2<\/span>). Compare Heb9:23<\/span>, which shows that there is something antitypical to theBible in heaven itself (compare Re20:12<\/span>). The Greek,<\/I> “itself,” distinguishes thebook itself<\/I> from the “precepts” in it which he “spake.”<\/P><\/p>\n For when Moses had spoken every precept<\/strong>,…. Contained in the decalogue, in the book of the covenant, everyone of the precepts in Ex 22:1<\/span> for this is to be understood of the written law, and not of the oral law the Jews talk of, which they say Moses first delivered by word of mouth to Aaron, then to his two sons, Eleazar and Ithamar, then to the seventy elders of Israel, and then to the whole congregation; so that Aaron heard it four times, his sons thrice, the seventy elders twice, and all Israel once g: but this is the written law which he spoke audibly, and in a known language,<\/p>\n to all the people according to the law<\/strong>; which God gave him on the Mount: this may instruct persons concerned in the public ministry, to speak out plainly and clearly the whole counsel of God, to all to whom they are sent, according to the word of God, which is the rule of faith and practice:<\/p>\n he took the blood of calves, and of goats<\/strong>; in the relation of this affair in Ex 24:5<\/span> which is referred to, only mention is made of oxen, bullocks, or heifers, here called calves, which were sacrificed for peace offerings, and not of goats; though perhaps they may be intended by the burnt offerings there spoken of, since they were sometimes used for burnt offerings, Le 1:10<\/span>. The Syriac version only reads, “he took the blood of an heifer”; and the Arabic version, “he took the blood of calves”; but all the copies, and other versions, read both. “With water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop”; neither of these are mentioned in Ex 24:1<\/span>, but since sprinkling is there said to be used, and blood and water mixed together, and scarlet and hyssop were used in sprinkling, as in sprinkling the leper, and the unclean house, Le 14:5<\/span> the apostle justly concludes the use of them here; the blood, with water, was typical of the blood and water which sprung from the side of Christ pierced on the cross, the one signifying justification by him, the other sanctification; the scarlet wool, which is originally white, but becomes scarlet by being dyed, may denote the native purity of Christ, and his bloody sufferings and death; the hyssop may signify his humility, and the purging virtue of his blood, and the sweet smelling savour of his person, righteousness, and sacrifice. The apostle calls scarlet, scarlet wool; though whenever the word is used in the Jewish laws of the Old Testament, wool is not expressed, but it is always intended; for it is a rule with the Jews h, that<\/p>\n “the blue, which is spoken of in every place, is wool dyed of a sky colour; purple is wool dyed red, and scarlet is wool dyed in scarlet.”<\/p>\n And sprinkled both the book, and all the people<\/strong>. In Ex 24:8<\/span> no mention is made of the sprinkling of the former, only of the latter, which the apostle either concludes from the sprinkling of the blood upon the altar, upon which the book might lie, or from tradition, or from divine revelation: some think it does not necessarily follow from the text, that the book was sprinkled; and repeating the word<\/p>\n , “he took”, read the words, “and he took the book and sprinkled all the people”; but this seems not natural, but forced; and besides, all the Oriental versions are express for the sprinkling of the book: the book of the law was sprinkled, not because of any impurity in it, but to show the imperfection of it, and its insufficiency to justify men; or rather the imperfection of man’s obedience to it, and to point out what the law requires in case of disobedience, even the blood and life of men; and what it would be, was it not sprinkled with blood, or satisfied by the blood of Christ, namely, an accusing, cursing, and condemning law: the people, all of them, being sprinkled with the blood, were typical of God’s peculiar people, even all the elect of God, being sprinkled with the blood of Christ, called the blood of sprinkling, by which they are redeemed, and which speaks peace and pardon to them. Some have thought only the seventy elders were sprinkled, as representing the whole congregation; and others, that the twelve pillars were only sprinkled, as representing the twelve tribes of Israel; but Moses and the apostle agree, that they were the people that were sprinkled.<\/p>\n g Maimon. Praefat. ad Yad Chazaka. h lb. Hilchot Cele Hamikdash, c. 8. sect. 13.<\/p>\n When every commandment had been spoken <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>). Genitive absolute with first aorist passive participle feminine singular of <\/SPAN><\/span>. The author uses the account in Ex 24:3f.<\/span> “with characteristic freedom” (Moffatt). There is nothing there about the water, the scarlet wool (<\/SPAN><\/span>, diminutive of , <\/SPAN><\/span>, old word, here and in Re 1:14<\/span>; for <\/SPAN><\/span> see on Matt 27:6<\/span>; Matt 27:28<\/span>), and hyssop (<\/SPAN><\/span>, a plant mentioned in Joh 19:29<\/span>). It had become the custom to mingle water with the blood and to use a wisp of wool or a stem of hyssop for sprinkling (Nu 10:2-10<\/span>).<\/P> Both the book itself <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). There is nothing in Exodus about sprinkling the book of the covenant, though it may very well have been done. He omits the use of oil in Exod 40:9<\/span>; Lev 8:10<\/span> and applies blood to all the details.<\/P> Sprinkled <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>). First aorist active indicative from <\/SPAN><\/span> (from <\/SPAN><\/span> and this from <\/SPAN><\/span>), like <\/SPAN><\/span> from <\/SPAN><\/span>. Cf. Mark 7:4<\/span>; Heb 10:22<\/span>; Rev 19:13<\/span>. <\/P> <\/p>\n The statement of verse 18 historically confirmed by the story of the establishment of the law – covenant, Exodus 24<\/span>. <\/P> Of calves and goats [ ] <\/SPAN><\/span>. Not mentioned in the O. T. account. The goat was always for a sin – offering, and the sacrifices on this occasion were oxen, and are described as burnt offerings and sacrifices of peace, Exo 24:5<\/span>. In the original covenant with Abraham a she – goat and a heifer are specially mentioned, Gen 14:9<\/span>. <\/P> Water, scarlet wool, hyssop – sprinkled the book [, , ] <\/SPAN><\/span>. None of these are mentioned in the O. T. account, which the writer appears to have filled up from the details of subsequent usage. Comp. the additions in vers. 5, <\/P> Heb 9:1<\/span>0It will also be observed that the sacrifices on the occasion of establishing the law covenant were not made according to the Mosaic ritual. They were offered, not by the priests, but by the young men, Exo 24:5<\/span>. For kokkinov scarlet, see on Mt 27:6<\/span>. %Usswpov hyssop appears in Exo 12:22<\/span>; Lev 14:4<\/span>, 6<\/span>, 49<\/span>; Num 19:6<\/span>, 18<\/span>; Psa 51:9<\/span>; Joh 19:29<\/span>. Mostly in connection with lustral ceremonies. The vexed question of the precise botanical character of the plant has never been decisively settled. 213<\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “For when-Moses had spoken every precept,”<\/strong> (Ioleitheises gar pases entoles) “For when every commandment (was) having been spoken,” (by Moses), every principle or every doctrine, Exo 24:3-5<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “To all the people,”<\/strong> (panti to lao) “To or toward all the laity (the people); to the public, the masses, Exo 24:3<\/span>.<\/p>\n 3) “According to the law,”<\/strong> (kata ton nomon hupo Mouseos) “According to the law by Moses,” .<\/p>\n 4) “He took the blood of calves and of goats,”<\/strong> (labon to haima ton moschon kai ton tragon) “Taking the blood of the calves and the goats,” Exo 24:5-6<\/span>. This was the blood of the testament.<\/p>\n 5) “With water and scarlet and wool and hyssop,”<\/strong> (meta hudatos kai eriou kokinou kai hussopou) “With water, wool, scarlet and hyssop,” Lev 14:4-7<\/span>. The people promised to obey all.<\/p>\n 6) “And sprinkled both the book and all the people,”<\/strong> (auto te to biblion kai panta ton laon errantisen) “He took it and both the scroll and all the people he sprinkled,” Exo 24:6-8<\/span>. Indicating that the holy law was to be a guide to a sanctified people as they walked in its precepts or principles.<\/p>\n (19) Every precept.<\/strong>Or, commandment.<\/em> See Exo. 24:3<\/span>; where we read that Moses told the people all the words of the Lord, and all the judgments. These he wrote in a book (Heb. 9:4<\/span>), and this book of the covenant (Heb. 9:7<\/span>) he read in the audience of the people. The contents would probably be the Ten Commandments, and the laws of Exo. 20:22<\/span> to Exo. 23:33<\/span>.<\/p>\n Of calves and of goats.<\/strong>In Exodus (Heb. 9:5<\/span>) we read of burnt offerings and of peace offerings of oxen. The goats may be included in the burnt offerings; for though Jewish tradition held that a goat was never sacrificed as a burnt offering, Lev. 1:10<\/span> is clear on the other side. It is possible that the calves and the goats may be only a general expression for the sacrificial victims. (See Heb. 9:12<\/span>.)<\/p>\n With water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop.<\/strong>In Exodus 24<\/span> there is no mention of these details, but similar notices are found in other parts of the Pentateuch, where the ceremony of sprinkling for purification is described (Exo. 12:22<\/span>; Lev. 14:4<\/span>; Lev. 14:6<\/span>; and Num. 19:6<\/span>; Num. 19:17-18<\/span>). The water (itself an emblem and means of cleansing) was designed to prevent the coagulation of the blood, and to increase the quantity of the purifying fluid. The scarlet wool may have been used to bind the hyssop to the stick of cedar-wood, which was the instrument of sprinkling. The precise notices in the Law forbid us to doubt that each of these substances had a definite symbolical meaning, but to us the subject is involved in obscurity.<\/p>\n Both the book and all the people<\/strong>.The Greek is more emphatic: both the book itself and all the people.<\/em> The latter fact alone is mentioned in Exodus (Heb. 9:8<\/span>). The sprinkling of the book of the covenant may be regarded from two points of view. It may depend either on the same principle as the (later) sprinkling of the Tabernacle (Heb. 9:22<\/span>), and the reconciling of the Tabernacle and the Holy Place (Lev. 16:20<\/span>) on the Day of Atonement; or on the symbolism of the covenant as noticed above (Heb. 9:15-17<\/span>). In the latter case we must suppose that, as the blood was divided into two portions (Exo. 24:6<\/span>) in token of the two parties to the covenant, and part cast upon the altar, the book of the covenant was associated with the altar as representing the presence of Jehovah.<\/p>\n d. <\/em><\/strong> As by a profuse typical blood the earthly ritual things are purified, so with a better sacrifice are the heavenly things consecrated, Heb 9:19-28<\/em><\/span><\/em> .<\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n The profuseness of blood application in the types, 19-22; the correspondences in the antitype, 23-28.<\/p>\n 19<\/strong>. <\/strong> For<\/strong> To show with what tokens of death <\/strong> the first covenant testament was Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n