New answers tagged

2

The Hebrew word נֶפֶשׁ (nephesh = "soul") has a very broad meaning and widely used idiom. A glance at BDB or any other lexicon shows this quite dramatically - the entry for this word will be very long. Actually, the meaning in Hebrew is not all that far from the broad meaning of "soul" in English - People talk about "the inmost ...


1

Let's see the context: Leviticus3:12 “If his offering is a goat, then he shall offer it before the LORD 13and lay his hand on its head and kill it in front of the tent of meeting, and the sons of Aaron shall throw its blood against the sides of the altar. 14Then he shall offer from it, as his offering for a food offering to the LORD, the fat covering the ...


-3

I believe that the prophetic meaning if the burnt offering, Jesus death, the death of the Lamb of God could not be associated with any sweetness. That's what I understand in my spirit. Comments are welcome.


1

Several points: #1) The issue (as defined by the verse) is coming into the holies. One need not read any connection with seeing God's face, a technical term found in Exodus. #2) "For with a cloud I will appear" Cloud of course connotes opaqueness, lack of transparency. The lack of transparency can be either in space of time. In space, it simply ...


1

The word translated "consumption" by NASB is שַׁחֶפֶת (shachepheth) which just means "wasting disease" (BDB) of which the most common was "consumption". Note the explanation from Wikipedia about tuberculosis - Tuberculosis (TB) is an infectious disease usually caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) bacteria.[1] ...


2

It means no rain from heaven and therefore nothing will grow on earth. Similar threat is found in Deuteronomy 28:23-24 23 The sky over your head will be bronze, the ground beneath you iron. 24 The Lord will turn the rain of your country into dust and powder; it will come down from the skies until you are destroyed.


1

Leviticus 21:1-3 specifically prohibits a priest from burying a wife, may heaven forbid he should have such a need. The structure makes this clear: A generalized prohibition (people) a specific exception (his survivors) a limitation on the exception to a specific list The operative terms here are a) שארו, his survivors, the same term as is used in the laws ...


1

It does appear to me that the clearest interpretation of the text is that indeed, he can't bury his wife. It can be argued, as in the commentary Tony Chan quotes, that the "kin who is near unto him" covers this case and perhaps others, further removed. However, to me it does not seem the natural interpretation. The "near kin" appears ...


2

The answer is Yes. | Unless the wife was a divorcee, then No because the marriage would have violated Leviticus 21:7 (based on Yevamot 22b).** In the Talmud, we read Yevamot 22b verse 3: פשיטא אחיו הוא סד"א הואיל וכתיב (ויקרא כא, ב) כי אם לשארו הקרוב אליו ואמר מר שארו זו אשתו וכתיב (ויקרא כא, ד) לא יטמא בעל בעמיו להחלו יש בעל שמטמא ויש בעל שאין מטמא הא ...


2

The ‘10’, or the ‘613’? The purpose of Torah was to separate. To separate this nation from ‘the others’. To make them Holy. And, that is the definition of ‘holy’ - that is, separated (for a purpose). In this respect, the Torah did not, or was not ‘known’ or practiced prior to Sinai. If you are specifically referencing the ‘10’, the purpose of these was to ...


1

For the purposes of this discussion, let us distinguish between the broadly "moral" and "ethical" laws from the ceremonial laws (priests and Tabernacle laws) and the jurisprudence laws. The moral/ethical laws summarized in the 10 commandments and also by the two great "love laws" of Deut 6:4 & Lev 19:18 were well known ...


1

What was the מֹּ֑לֶךְ Molek idol in Leviticus 18:21? "Do not allow any of your offspring to be offered up to Molek, and do not profane the name of your God: I am YHVH." ( וּמִֽזַּרְעֲךָ֥ לֹא־תִתֵּ֖ן לְהַעֲבִ֣יר לַמֹּ֑לֶךְ וְלֹ֧א תְחַלֵּ֛ל אֶת־שֵׁ֥ם אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ אֲנִ֥י יְהוָֽה ) Ibn Ezra explains : Molekh the name of an idol. Our Sages, of blessed ...


2

The short answer to the question is "yes" - the entire sermon on the mount is based around two ideas: The various laws in the Torah most often (but not only) the 10 commandments and other laws The narrow interpretations of many of these laws common at the time. Jesus Himself emphasised this very point in Matt 5:17-19 by saying (near the beginning ...


2

If you read the complete verse of Leviticus 11:21, the total legs of a kosher flying insect הָע֔וֹף are 6 [legs] = אַרְבַּ֑ע Arba 4 [legs] + 2 Kra'ayim כְרָעַ֨יִם֙ Jointed [legs] above. In Hebrew, the phrase " הָע֔וֹף הַהֹלֵ֖ךְ עַל־אַרְבַּ֑ע " means "insect that walks on four [legs]" in English. - Notice the additional 2 Kra'ayim ...


3

This is not a "phrase used by translators", it is the literal text, which says "holekh al arba" or "walk on four". I don't think translators should change that to read "six" to aid our understanding, but should give a faithful literal translation, which they did. Then, it is the job of interpreters to dig into semitic ...


-1

Genesis gives us two descriptions of creating man. This is the first: Genesis 1:27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. 28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; So God created man and woman, release them to the world, and told them to procreate. The ...


1

Does it mean that their offspring had to procreate among themselves in order to populate the earth? Yes, a brother married his sister. Etc. Why is Leviticus 18:6-18 in contradiction with what was natural at that time, which is to procreate within the same blood? Leviticus happened thousands of years later. Different times, different laws. There is even a ...


1

How is Leviticus 16:8 not considered a sacrifice to Azazel? This is a great question. At its most primitive level, of course it is a sacrifice to Azazel, since It is something of value (a goat, without blemish). It is given to Azazel as part of a ritual That it is given to Azazel is clear by the words "for Azazel" - the "lo" - ...


1

Gathering background on the Prohibitions Before Noah, man was only given the green plants to eat, not animals, so there was no issue of blood. But after the flood, we get the first prohibiton Prohibition in Noah's covenant Gen 9.1-7 (LEB): And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. And fear of you and ...


2

The Jewish Encyclopedia provides a wealth of information about demonology in the Tanach. I quote just a bit below, but provide the link to the full article: ...The demons mentioned in the Bible are of two classes, the "se'irim" and the "shedim." The se'irim ("hairy beings"), to which the Israelites sacrificed in the open fields ...


3

This question verges on a truth that is important. There are traditional explanations, but this isn’t one of them, it it provided for thought. Leviticus 16 outlines Yom Kippur. It is about ‘sin’, in particular, covering it. Why cover? Because if it’s uncovered, it can be judged, and in the case of the Israelites, it would be. Now here is the pivotal question ...


1

Leviticus 17:3-4 is talking to the Israelites in the desert when they were all camping together and in close proximity to the tabernacle, or even later in the period of the Judges where the Israelites were still tribal and in close proximity to each other. They were then forbidden to eat meat unless they sacrificed the inedible parts to the Lord in the ...


1

It was a common form of worship at that time in that general area. Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers (7) And they shall no more offer their sacrifices unto devils.--The word (s?irim) here translated "devils," literally denotes hairy or shaggy goats, and then goat-like deities, or demons. The Egyptians, and other nations of antiquity, ...


2

Deuteronomy 12:15-16 refers to the killing of animals for personal consumption any time, any where, not for sacrifice. This is allowed. E.g., They could kill animals that were unacceptable for sacrifice, like a defective lamb. Leviticus 1:3 “ ‘If the offering is a burnt offering from the herd, you are to offer a male without defect. You must present it at ...


1

"Cast Lots" is not a hebrew phrase used in Leviticus 16:8. - In the Tanakh, [Leviticus 16:8] states : "and Aharon shall put upon [the] two goats : Goralot. one marked for YHVH and the other marked for Azazel." ( וְנָתַ֧ן אַהֲרֹ֛ן עַל־שְׁנֵ֥י הַשְּׂעִירִ֖ם גּוֹרָל֑וֹת גּוֹרָ֤ל אֶחָד֙ לַיהוָ֔ה וְגוֹרָ֥ל אֶחָ֖ד לַעֲזָאזֵֽל ) "Goralot&...


3

This is quite uncomplicated. Lev 4 In Leviticus 4 we have the instructions for (V2) one who sins unintentionally against any of the LORD’s commandments and does what is forbidden by them Lev 9 By contrast, Leviticus 9 is part of the narrative in Lev 8 & 9 which describes the ordination/initiation/consecration of the High priesthood of Aaron. Thus, the ...


0

Clear contradiction; This has nothing to do about different audiences or civil and religious laws these are merely distractions/ excuses. Jesus says - Matthew 5:17-19 "17 Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle ...


0

He has to offer the Ram and also the Silver, of the value of fifth of the value of the ram. This Silver is to be offered as a monetary penalty for sin against the "Holy Things". (A 'thing' for a 'thing'). Ref: Levictus 24:20, Exodus 21:24


0

The penalty of death still stands under the New Covenant. It still stands since Christ burst onto the scene (as promised and prophesied since Gen3) at approx. 4BC The penalty of sin is death. Now though, through Jesus, we have opportunity that the OT looked forward to, but never experienced in it's fulness. (Abraham was blessed with seeing with the mind of ...


2

The word translated "consecration" is מִלֻּא (millu) meaning "setting" or "installation" and has two different uses: It can mean a setting for a stone, eg, Ex 25:7, 35:9, 27, 1 Chron 29:2, etc Setting something or someone apart for a special use in the sense that the object or person is installed as a consecrated person as a ...


2

What's is the relevance of blood which makes one being prohibited of eating it? The blood has atoning power. It is the seat of life. Leviticus 17:10“ ‘I will set my face against any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who eats blood, and I will cut them off from the people. 11For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you ...


3

Could the offer be silver that matched the value of the ram? No, because blood is necessary. Leviticus 5:14 The Lord said to Moses: 15“When anyone is unfaithful to the Lord by sinning unintentionally in regard to any of the Lord’s holy things, they are to bring to the Lord as a penalty a ram from the flock, one without defect and of the proper value in ...


1

At the ceremony when a new priest dressed in his liturgical vestments for the first time and received the congregation there was a special sacrifice. We can read more about it in Leviticus 8:22-30 (KJV) And he brought the other ram, the ram of consecration: and Aaron and his sons laid their hands upon the head of the ram. And he slew it; and Moses took of ...


2

Why is the hired servant not allowed to eat the holy thing in Leviticus 22:10-11? What was the major difference between the hired servant and slave that could have warranted that a slave partake of the holy thing ahead of a hired servant? A hired servant was usually not an Israelite but someone from the surrounding nations. The article Hired Laborer, or ...


1

But these scriptures aren't contradictory. In today's secular world, the law says that: The civil authority must put criminals in jail. Confining another person is a crime. That is not a contradiction. The first is a directive to the judicial system and the second to the general public. An ordinary citizen is not allowed to lock up someone just because ...


0

In Leviticus 24, Moses was addressing the audience of the Israelites. They were supposed to be a holy nation chosen by God. Further, the law was specifically about blasphemy. In Mathew 5, Jesus was addressing not just the Jews but also the gentiles. Further, it wasn't about blasphemy. In fact, Jesus pointed out in Matthew 12:31 And so I tell you, every kind ...


0

Leviticus can’t be compared with the gospel as presented by Paul in the New Testament. Paul’s Gospel was one of Grace and Mercy. Leviticus was outlining the Law. There is no Grace, nor Mercy under the Law. Moses was warned (after the Law came) by the Angel that would lead the Israelites that there would be zero tolerance. EXODUS 23:21 Beware of Him and obey ...


2

In Lev 1:16 the operative word is נוֹצָה (notsah) meaning "plumage". It occurs four times in the OT as follows: Lev 1:16 - He is to remove the crop and the feathers and throw them down east of the altar where the ashes are. Job 39:13 - The wings of the ostrich flap joyfully, but cannot match the pinions and feathers of the stork. Eze 17:3 - and ...


2

When a person has a pet animal, one of the oldest and most common forms of animal affection is the "pet" the animal by stroking from the head down toward the back. This is universally understood to signify love for the animal which involved protection and provision for the animal's needs. We still do this today with dogs and cats, etc. Placing ...


2

The presenter/sinner symbolically identified himself with the animal to be killed. The act foreshadowed the perfect atonement of Christ. Pulpit Commentary This putting, or forcibly leaning, the hand on the victim's head, which is the most essential part of the oblation of the victim, was a symbolical act implying "This animal is now for present ...


Top 50 recent answers are included