6, 7<\/strong>. The animals for the Sin-Offerings are presented ‘before the Lord.’ The verb in Lev 16:7<\/em><\/span>, ‘and set them,’ is different from that in Lev 16:6<\/em><\/span>, ‘and Aaron shall present’; after the lots are cast, Aaron ‘presents’ the goat ‘upon which the lot fell for the Lord’ ( Lev 16:9<\/em><\/span>). No distinction is made in A.V.<\/p>\n Shall offer – <\/B>Rather, shall present, as in Lev 16:7<\/span>, Lev 16:10<\/span>, etc. The word expresses the formal act of placing the victims in front of the entrance of the tabernacle.<\/P> For himself, and for his house – <\/B>i. e. for himself as the high priest and all the common priests. Compare Lev 9:7-14<\/span> note.<\/P> <\/p>\n i.e. His family, as Gen 7:1<\/span>, to wit, the priests and Levites. See Num 1:49<\/span>. <\/P> <\/p>\n And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin offering, which [is] for himself<\/strong>,…. That is, bring it into the court, and present it before the Lord in order to its being slain and sacrificed; for as yet it was not killed, and so could not be offered on the altar, see<\/p>\n Le 16:11<\/span>; the place where the bullock was set was between the porch and the altar, his head in the south, and his face to the west, and the priest stood in the east, and his face to the west, and laid both his hands upon him, and confessed his sins, and his family’s x: and this is said to be “for himself”; not to atone for him, which is afterwards expressed, but which should come of him or from him, and not from the congregation, as Jarchi explains it; or as the Targum of Jonathan more clearly, which is of his own money, wholly at his own expense, and not the people’s:<\/p>\n and make atonement for himself, and for his house<\/strong>; for himself, for his own personal sins and for his family’s sins, those of his wife and children; and it may be extended to all the priests of the house of Aaron; and some say to the Levites also, as Aben Ezra notes, though he disapproves of it: by this it appears, that Christ, the antitype of Aaron, is a more perfect and excellent priest than he, who needed not to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for his people’s, for this he did once, when he offered up himself, Heb 7:27<\/span>; and which was for his whole family, and them only, the elect of God, consisting of Jews and Gentiles; part of which is in heaven, and part on earth, and both were reconciled, or atonement made for them, by the blood of Christ; whose house and family men appear to be, when they believe and hope in him, and hold fast their faith and hope; and who are made by him priests as well as kings to God; see Eph 3:15<\/span> Re 1:6<\/span>.<\/p>\n x Misn. Yoma, c. 3. sect. 8.<\/p>\n With the bullock Aaron was to make atonement for himself and his house. The two he-goats he was to place before Jehovah (see Lev 1:5<\/span>), and “ give lots over them,<\/em> ” i.e., have lots cast upon them, one lot for Jehovah, the other for Azazel. The one upon which the lot for Jehovah fell ( , from the coming up of the lot out of the urn, Jos 18:11<\/span>; Jos 19:10<\/span>), he was to prepare as a sin-offering for Jehovah, and to present the one upon which the lot for Azazel fell alive before Jehovah, , “ to expiate it,<\/em> ” i.e., to make it the object of expiation (see at Lev 16:21<\/span>), to send it (them) into the desert to Azazel. , which only occurs in this chapter, signifies neither “a remote solitude,” nor any locality in the desert whatever (as Jonathan, Rashi,<\/em> etc., suppose); nor the “he-goat” (from goat, and to turn off, “the goat departing or sent away,” as Symm., Theodot.,<\/em> the Vulgate, Luther,<\/em> and others render it); nor “complete removal” (Bhr, Winer, Tholuck,<\/em> etc.). The words, one lot for Jehovah and one for Azazel, require unconditionally that Azazel<\/em> should be regarded as a personal being, in opposition to Jehovah. The word is a more intense form of removit, dimovit,<\/em> and comes from by absorbing the liquid, like Babel<\/em> from balbel<\/em> (Gen 11:9<\/span>), and Golgotha<\/em> from gulgalta<\/em> ( Ewald<\/em>, 158 c<\/em>). The Septuagint rendering is correct, ; although in Lev 16:10<\/span> the rendering is also adopted, i.e., “ averruncus <\/em>, a fiend, or demon whom one drives away” ( Ewald<\/em>). We have not to think, however, of any demon whatever, who seduces men to wickedness in the form of an evil spirit, as the fallen angel Azazel<\/em> is represented as doing in the Jewish writings (Book of Enoch 8:1; 10:10; 13:1ff.), like the terrible field Shibe<\/em>, whom the Arabs of the peninsula of Sinai so much dread ( Seetzen<\/em>, i. pp. 273-4), but of the devil himself, the head of the fallen angels, who was afterwards called Satan; for no subordinate evil spirit could have been placed in antithesis to Jehovah as Azazel<\/em> is here, but only the ruler or head of the kingdom of demons. The desert and desolate places are mentioned elsewhere as the abode of evil spirits (Isa 13:21<\/span>; Isa 34:14<\/span>; Mat 12:43<\/span>; Luk 11:24<\/span>; Rev 18:2<\/span>). The desert, regarded as an image of death and desolation, corresponds to the nature of evil spirits, who fell away from the primary source of life, and in their hostility to God devastated the world, which was created good, and brought death and destruction in their train.<\/p>\n Verses 6-14:<\/strong><\/p>\n Aaron was first to offer the bullock as his own offering for sin, see Le 1:3-9. Then he was to dispose of the two goats as follows:<\/p>\n 1. Lots were cast to determine the disposition of each of the twelve young goats.<\/p>\n 2. One goat was to be slain, as a Sin Offering, Le 4:17-35.<\/p>\n 3. The other goat was to be a “scapegoat,” azazel. <\/strong>This term occurs only four times in Scripture, all in this chapter, verses 8, 10, 26. It is from the root word azal, <\/strong>meaning “removal.” The reduplication form azael <\/strong>means “removal by a series of acts.” The ideas that azazel <\/strong>is the name of a specific location, or symbolic of a demon spirit or Satan himself, or the symbolic designation fo the goat itself, may all be rejected as contrary both to laws of grammar, and to Scripture principles.<\/p>\n After this selection, Aaron was to offer the bullock for himself and his “house.” He was then to fill a censer, machtah, <\/strong>with coals from the brazen altar. He was to take sweet incense with him into the Holy of Holies, where he would immediately place the incense on the coals, as a kind of veil of covering before the presence of Jehovah.<\/p>\n In addition to the censer and incense, Aaron was to carry a portion of the blood of his offering into the Holy of Holies, where he was to sprinkle it seven times upon the mercy seat covering the ark.<\/p>\n The incense and the blood assured Aaron of his own acceptance, to serve as the mediator between Jehovah and the people. This is in contrast to Christ, the High Priest of the New Covenant, who has no need to offer sacrifice for Himself, for He is without sin, Heb 5:1-4.<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n (6) And Aaron shall offer.<\/strong>Better, And Aaron shall present, <\/em>or bring near, <\/em>as the word literally denotes (comp, Lev. 16:9<\/span>; Lev. 16:11<\/span>, &c.), since the actual offering or killing took place afterwards, when the lots for the goats had been cast, as described in Lev. 16:11<\/span>.<\/p>\n For himself, and for his house.<\/strong>By this is meant that the atonement was for his own sins, for those of his family and for all the priests, the sons of Aaron. The ritual at this pontifical sacrifice during the second Temple was most solemn and impressive.<\/p>\n By the side of the victim, which was placed between the porch and the altar towards the east, stood the high priest, arrayed in his white robes, with his face towards the west. In this attitude of a penitent sinner, the pontiff laid both his hands upon the sacrifice and confessed his sins in an audible voice in the sight of God and the assembled congregation as follows: O Lord, I have sinned, I have committed iniquity, I have transgressed before thee, I and my house. O Lord, I beseech thee cover over my sins, iniquities, and transgressions which I have committed before thee, I and my house, even as it is written in the Law of Moses thy servantFor on that day He will cover over for you and cleanse you from all your sins, &c. To this the congregation replied: Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom for ever and ever. Whereupon the high priest repeated this confession a second time, including in it the children of Aaron, Gods holy people. (See Lev. 16:11<\/span>.)<\/p>\n 6<\/strong>. <\/strong> Shall offer <\/strong> R.V., “present.” The actual offering does not take place until Lev 16:11<\/span>. <\/p>\n An atonement for himself <\/strong> “An innocent man,” says Van der Waegen, “must come and make atonement for the guilty; but the guilty may not come and make atonement for the innocent.” Since innocence is not inherent in fallen man by nature or practice, only as one who had himself been atoned could the high priest make atonement for others. “Every reconciling and sanctifying effect of the sacrifices is dependent on the existence of a personally reconciling mediatorship before God; and here the old covenant proclaims its inadequacy to institute a real reconciliation, in the fact that even the high priest himself, through whose intercessions the defect which attaches to the offering is made good, himself in turn has need of reconciliation and purification, as one subject to sin and weakness.” Comp. Heb 5:3<\/span>. Oehler. <\/em> Here the Antitype, Jesus, differs from his types. His priesthood was unique in its sinlessness, and his piety unique in its impenitence. When God acknowledges a high priest as well-pleasing in his sight, this is a real declaration that he graciously accepts the whole people. On the contrary, his error is the inculpation of the people. Lev 4:3<\/span>, note. That this required atonement is for involuntary defects and inadvertencies arising from fallen nature, rather than for special cases of transgression, is evident not only from the provision made for the latter in Lev 4:3-12<\/span>, but also from the presumption of sinfulness referred to in Lev 16:3<\/span>, note. Aaron’s confession of sin was in these words: “O, for Jehovah’s sake, do Thou expiate the misdeeds, the crimes, and the sins wherewith I have done evil, and have sinned before thee, I and my house, as is written in the law of Moses thy servant,” concluding with quoting Lev 16:30<\/span>. Delitzsch on the Hebrews, Appendix. <\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n And for his house <\/strong> Hence only a married high priest was permitted to officiate on the day of atonement.<\/p>\n “And Aaron shall present the bull ox of the purification for sin offering, which is for himself, and make atonement for himself, and for his house.” <\/p>\n First of all Aaron has to make atonement for himself and for his house by offering the bull ox for a purification for sin offering. At this stage, however, he merely ‘presents’ it, although it is pointed out that its final purpose is that it might make atonement. <\/p>\n Lev 16:6 And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin offering, which [is] for himself, and make an atonement for himself, and for his house.<\/p>\n Ver. 6. And for his house.<\/strong> ] Whereof a minister must be mainly careful, 1Ti 3:4 lest, as Augustus doing justice on others, he be hit in the teeth with his own disordered family. Aaron had lately smarted in his two eldest.<\/p>\n offer = bring near. Hebrew. karab. App-43. <\/p>\n make an atonement. See note on Exo 29:33. <\/p>\n Atonement <\/p>\n Atonement. The biblical use and meaning of the word must be sharply distinguished from its use in theology. In theology it is term which covers the whole sacrificial and redemptive work of Christ. In the O.T. atonement is the English word used to translate the Hebrew words which mean “cover,” “coverings,” or “to cover.” Atonement (at-one-ment) is, therefore, not a translation of the hebrew, but a purely theologic concept. The Levitical offerings “covered” the sins of Israel until, and in anticipation of the Cross, but did not “take away” Heb 10:4 those sins. These were the “sins done aforetime” (“covered” meantime by the Levitical sacrifices), which God “passed over” Rom 3:25 for which “passing over” God’s righteousness was never vindicated until, in the Cross, Jesus Christ was “set forth a propitiation.” See “Propitiation,” (See Scofield “Rom 3:25”). It was the Cross, not the Levitical sacrifices which made “at-one-ment.” The O.T. sacrifices enabled God to go on with a guilty people because they typified the Cross. To the offerer they were the confession of his desert of death, and the expression of his faith; to God they were the “shadows” Heb 10:1 of which Christ was the reality. <\/p>\n atonement (See Scofield “Exo 29:33”). <\/p>\n which: Lev 8:14-17, Heb 9:7 <\/p>\n for himself: Lev 9:7, Ezr 10:18, Ezr 10:19, Job 1:5, Eze 43:19, Eze 43:27, Heb 5:2 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Exo 30:10 – sin offering Lev 4:3 – a young bullock Lev 16:11 – General Lev 16:25 – General Lev 16:33 – General Num 8:12 – atonement Heb 5:3 – as Heb 7:27 – first Heb 10:3 – a remembrance<\/p>\n An outline of the ceremonies 16:6-10<\/span><\/p>\n Aaron first offered the bull as a sin (purification) offering to cover his sins and the sins of the other priests (Lev 16:6). Then he cast lots to decide which of the two goats would die as a sin offering for the people and which one would be sent into the wilderness (Lev 16:7-8). Then he sacrificed the goat that was to die (Lev 16:9). Finally he brought the other goat before the Lord and then dispatched it into the wilderness (Lev 16:10).<\/p>\n And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin offering, which [is] for himself, and make an atonement for himself, and for his house. 6, 7. The animals for the Sin-Offerings are presented ‘before the Lord.’ The verb in Lev 16:7, ‘and set them,’ is different from that in Lev 16:6, ‘and Aaron shall present’; … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 16:6”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3216","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3216","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3216"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3216\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3216"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3216"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3216"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old 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
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"