2

Leviticus 10 (KJV) gives us an account of the death of Nadab and Abihu for using a strange fire. God sends down His fire of judgement in verse 2. Moses then goes ahead to give out a series of instructions to Aaron and his sons but suddenly starts looking for the sin offering in verse 17, for which he had told them to eat it (verse 12). Moses gets very angry with Eleazar and Ithamar.

What did Aaron respond in verse 19 that so pleased Moses? What is the exact element in Aaron's response that made Moses "content"?

2

Arron and his two remaining sons were in the process of grieving over the deaths of Nadab and Abihu. In their present state of consecration, they were not permitted to even uncover their heads, nor were they permitted to tear their cloths according to the traditional expressions of the mourner. These were holy garments. They were not even permitted to attend the funerals because they were still in the process of consecration. To do so would have meant leaving the tent of meeting before the seven days of consecration had been completed. Under normal situations, they would have been permitted to mourn in this way but, this was not a normal situation.

This seems to have been well understood by Aaron when he and his two remaining sons abstained from eating the sin offering of the people as the ritual of that particular sin offering demanded.

Moses searched carefully for the goat of the sin offering, and behold, it had been burned up! So, he was angry with Aaron’s surviving sons Eleazar and Ithamar, saying, ‘Why did you not eat the sin offering at the holy place? For it is most holy, and He gave it to you to bear away the guilt of the congregation, to make atonement for them before the Lord. Behold, since its blood had not been brought inside, into the sanctuary, you should certainly have eaten it in the sanctuary, just as I commanded.’ But Aaron spoke to Moses, ‘Behold, this very day they presented their sin offering and their burnt offering before the Lord. When things like these happened to me, if I had eaten a sin offering today, would it have been good in the sight of the Lord?’ When Moses heard that, it seemed good in his sight, 16-20.

In Deuteronomy 12:6-7, the Lord has this to say about the eating of the sacrifices.

There you shall bring your burnt offerings, your sacrifices, your tithes, the contribution of your hand, your votive offerings, your freewill offerings, and the firstborn of your herd and of your flock. There also you and your households shall eat before the Lord your God and rejoice in all your undertakings in which the Lord your God has blessed you.

Since Aaron had just suffered the sudden loss of his two oldest sons, this was a proper time of sorrow and feasting. The eating of the sin offering was to be celebrated with joy. This would have created a conflict of interest. The two are incompatible. It would have been improper for Aaron and his sons to eat of the sacrifice while in a state of grief and mourning over their loss; And “When Moses heard that, it seemed good in his sight.”

This practice even became a Levitical statute during the second temple. According to Ellicott,

In consequence of this declaration, the rule obtained during the second Temple, that when an ordinary priest heard of the death of a relative while on duty in the sanctuary, he had to cease from service, though he could not leave the precincts of the Temple otherwise he defiled the sacrifice; while the high priest, who could continue his sacred ministrations, was not allowed to partake of the sacrificial meal.

If Aaron had eaten the sin offering, this would have been a violation of the command because he could not have eaten it with rejoicing because he was in mourning. This principle also show up in Mark 2:18-20.

John’s disciples and the Pharisees were fasting; and they came and said to Him, ‘Why do John’s disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast?’ And Jesus said to them, ‘While the bridegroom is with them, the attendants of the bridegroom cannot fast, can they? So long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day.

Both mourning and celebration are profitable in their proper contexts but when they are joined together, they represent a contradiction that destroys the significance of both the mourning and the joy. While Jesus was with them, it was time for joy and celebration which was to be joined with feasting. When he was taken away, then would be the proper time for sorrow which is accompanied by fasting.

| improve this answer | |
  • Thanks for your answer. I would like to ask what was more important; obeying the direct command to eat the sacrifice as in Deuteronomy 12:6,7 or justifying a conflict of interest to Moses? – Helicotylen May 15 at 19:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.