Leviticul 6
1 Domnul a vorbit lui Moise, şi a zis:
2 ,,Când va păcătui cineva şi va săvârşi o nelegiuire faţă de Domnul, tăgăduind aproapelui său un lucru încredinţat lui, sau dat în păstrarea lui, sau luat cu sila, sau va înşela pe aproapele lui,
3 tăgăduind că a găsit un lucru perdut, sau făcând un jurământ strâmb cu privire la un lucru oarecare pe care-l face omul şi păcătuieşte;
4 când va păcătui astfel şi se va face vinovat, să dea înapoi lucrul luat cu sila sau luat prin înşelăciune, sau încredinţat lui, sau lucrul perdut pe care l-a găsit,
5 sau lucru pentru care a făcut un jurământ strâmb-ori care ar fi-să-l dea înapoi întreg, să mai adauge a cincea parte din preţul lui, şi să-l dea în mâna stăpânului lui, chiar în ziua când îşi va aduce jertfa lui pentru vină.
6 Iar ca jertfă pentru vină, să aducă Domnului pentru păcatul lui un berbece fără cusur, luat din turmă, după preţuirea ta, şi să-l dea preotului.
7 Şi preotul va face pentru el ispăşirea înaintea Domnului, şi i se va ierta, ori care ar fi greşeala, de care se va fi făcut vinovat.``
8 Domnul a vorbit lui Moise, şi a zis:
9 ,,Dă următoarea poruncă lui Aaron şi fiilor săi, şi zi: ,,Iată legea arderii de tot. Arderea de tot să rămână pe vatra altarului toată noaptea până dimineaţa, şi în felul acesta focul să ardă pe altar.
10 Preotul să se îmbrace cu tunica de in, să-şi acopere goliciunea cu ismenele, să ia cenuşa făcută de focul, care va mistui arderea de tot de pe altar, şi s-o verse lângă altar.
11 Apoi să se desbrace de veşmintele lui şi să se îmbrace cu altele, ca să scoată cenuşa afară din tabără, într-un loc curat.
12 Focul să ardă pe altar şi să nu se stingă deloc: în fiecare dimineaţă, preotul să aprindă lemne pe altar, să aşeze arderea de tot pe ele, şi să ardă deasupra grăsimea jertfelor de mulţămire.
13 Focul să ardă necurmat pe altar şi să nu se stingă deloc.
14 ,,Iată legea darului adus ca jertfă de mâncare. Fiii lui Aaron s-o aducă înaintea Domnului, înaintea altarului.
15 Preotul să ia un pumn din floarea făinii şi din untdelemn, cu toată tămâia adăugată la darul de mâncare, şi s-o ardă pe altar ca aducere aminte de un miros plăcut Domnului.
16 Aaron şi fiii lui să mănânce ce va mai rămânea din darul de mâncare; s-o mănânce fără aluat, într-un loc sfânt, în curtea cortului întâlnirii.
17 Să n-o coacă cu aluat. Aceasta este partea pe care le-am dat-o Eu din darurile Mele de mâncare mistuite de foc. Ea este un lucru prea sfânt, ca şi jertfa de ispăşire şi ca şi jertfa pentru vină.
18 Toată partea bărbătească dintre copiii lui Aaron să mănânce din ea. Aceasta este o lege vecinică pentru urmaşii voştri, cu privire la darurile de mâncare mistuite de foc înaintea Domnului: oricine se va atinge de ele va fi sfinţit.``
19 Domnul a vorbit lui Moise, şi a zis:
20 ,,Iată darul pe care îl vor face Domnului Aaron şi fiii lui, în ziua când vor primi ungerea: a zecea parte dintr-o efă de floarea făinii, ca dar de mâncare vecinic, jumătate dimineaţa şi jumătate seara.
21 Să fie pregătită în tigaie cu untdelemn, şi s-o aduci prăjită; s-o aduci coaptă şi tăiată în bucăţi, ca un dar de mâncare de un miros plăcut Domnului.
22 Preotul dintre fiii lui Aaron, care va fi uns în locul lui, să aducă darul acesta ca jertfă de mâncare. Aceasta este o lege vecinică înaintea Domnului: să fie arsă întreagă.
23 Orice dar de mâncare al unui preot să fie ars în întregime: să nu se mănânce.``
24 Domnul a vorbit lui Moise, şi a zis:
25 ,,Vorbeşte lui Aaron şi fiilor lui, şi zi: ,,Iată legea jertfei de ispăşire. Vita pentru jertfa de ispăşire să fie junghiată înaintea Domnului în locul unde se junghie arderea de tot: ea este un lucru prea sfânt.
26 Preotul care va aduce jertfa de ispăşire, acela s-o mănânce; şi anume să fie mâncată într-un loc sfânt, în curtea cortului întâlnirii.
27 Oricine se va atinge de carnea ei va fi sfinţit. Dacă va sări sânge din ea pe vre un veşmânt, locul stropit cu sânge să fie spălat într-un loc sfânt.
28 Vasul de pământ în care se va fierbe, să se spargă; dacă s-a fiert într-un vas de aramă, vasul să fie frecat şi spălat cu apă.
29 Toată partea bărbătească dintre preoţi să mănânce din ea: ea este un lucru prea sfânt.
30 Dar să nu se mănânce nici o jertfă de ispăşire din al cărei sânge se va aduce în cortul întâlnirii pentru facerea ispăşirii în sfântul locaş: ci aceea să fie arsă în foc.
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":27255,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Neighbor","title_en":"Neighbor","content_ro":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","summary_en":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28264,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":8078,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","title_en":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","content_ro":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","summary_en":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27261,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Neighbor","title_en":"Neighbor","content_ro":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","summary_en":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44115,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:2","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:2<\/strong> <em>sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to the<\/em><span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:2<\/strong> <em>sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to the<\/em><span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:2 sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to theLord: For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.","summary_en":"6:2 sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to theLord: For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71741,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:2","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:2<\/strong> <em>sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to the<\/em><span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:2<\/strong> <em>sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to the<\/em><span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:2 sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to theLord: For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.","summary_en":"6:2 sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to theLord: For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99367,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:2","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:2<\/strong> <em>sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to the<\/em><span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:2<\/strong> <em>sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to the<\/em><span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:2 sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to theLord: For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.","summary_en":"6:2 sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to theLord: For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126993,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:2","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:2<\/strong> <em>sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to the<\/em><span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:2<\/strong> <em>sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to the<\/em><span>Lord<\/span><em>:<\/em> For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:2 sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to theLord: For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.","summary_en":"6:2 sins against your associate . . . unfaithful to theLord: For believers, there really is no such thing as a “secular” sin. All sin involves God, even sin directed against another person or group. In the sins requiring a guilt offering, God’s forgiveness was needed, but restitution to the injured individual had to be made first (6:5-7; cp. Matt 5:23-24). Unlike offenses against sacred property (Lev 5:14-16), both accidental and intentional offenses against secular property could be forgiven.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":28018,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Oath","title_en":"Oath","content_ro":"<h3>OATH<\/h3>\n<p>Solemn vow or promise to fulfill a pledge. There are two terms in Hebrew that mean “oath”: <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘ala<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sebu’a<\/span><em>.<\/em> The latter, more general term in ancient times meant to enter into a solemn (even magical) relationship with the number seven, although ancient connections are lost. Even so, when Abraham and Abimelech entered into an oath at Beersheba (the well of seven, or the well of the oath), Abraham set aside seven ewe lambs as a witness to the fact that he had dug a well (Gn 21:22-31). The former term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘ala<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “oath,” properly means “curse.” At times the two terms are used together (Nm 5:21; Neh 10:29; Dn 9:11). Any breach of one’s undertaking affirmed by an oath would be attended by a curse. The Lord affirmed that he had established a covenant and a curse with Israel—that is, a breach of covenant would be followed by a curse (Dt 29:14ff.).<\/p>\n<p>An oath was taken to confirm an agreement or, in a political situation, to confirm a treaty. Both in Israel and among its neighbors, God (or the gods) would act as the guarantor(s) of the agreement and his name (or their names) was invoked for this purpose. When Jacob and Laban made an agreement, they erected a heap of stones as a witness (Gn 31:53). If either party transgressed the terms, it was a heinous sin. For this reason one of the Ten Commandments dealt with empty affirmations: “Do not misuse the name of the <span>Lord<\/span> your God. The <span>Lord<\/span> will not let you go unpunished if you misuse his name” (Ex 20:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people of Israel were forbidden to swear their oaths by false gods (Jer 12:16; Am 8:14). To breach an international treaty, where the oath was taken in the Lord’s name, merited death (Ez 17:16-17). It was one of the complaints of Hosea that the people of his day swore falsely when they made a covenant (Hos 10:4). Judgment would attend such wanton disregard of the solemnity of an oath. Certain civil situations in Israel called for an oath (Ex 22:10-11; Lv 5:1; 6:3; Nm 5:11-28). This practice provided a pattern for the Israelite covenantal oath of allegiance between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>Christ taught that oaths were binding (Mt 5:33). In the kingdom of God oaths would become unnecessary (vv 34-37). At his trial before Caiaphas, Jesus heard an imprecatory oath from the high priest (26:63-65), and Paul swore by an oath on occasion (2 Cor 1:23; Gal 1:20). God himself was bound by his own oath (Heb 6:13-18) to keep his promise to the patriarchs (Gn 50:24; Pss 89:19-37, 49; 110:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; Vows.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OATH<\/h3>\n<p>Solemn vow or promise to fulfill a pledge. There are two terms in Hebrew that mean “oath”: <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘ala<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sebu’a<\/span><em>.<\/em> The latter, more general term in ancient times meant to enter into a solemn (even magical) relationship with the number seven, although ancient connections are lost. Even so, when Abraham and Abimelech entered into an oath at Beersheba (the well of seven, or the well of the oath), Abraham set aside seven ewe lambs as a witness to the fact that he had dug a well (Gn 21:22-31). The former term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘ala<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “oath,” properly means “curse.” At times the two terms are used together (Nm 5:21; Neh 10:29; Dn 9:11). Any breach of one’s undertaking affirmed by an oath would be attended by a curse. The Lord affirmed that he had established a covenant and a curse with Israel—that is, a breach of covenant would be followed by a curse (Dt 29:14ff.).<\/p>\n<p>An oath was taken to confirm an agreement or, in a political situation, to confirm a treaty. Both in Israel and among its neighbors, God (or the gods) would act as the guarantor(s) of the agreement and his name (or their names) was invoked for this purpose. When Jacob and Laban made an agreement, they erected a heap of stones as a witness (Gn 31:53). If either party transgressed the terms, it was a heinous sin. For this reason one of the Ten Commandments dealt with empty affirmations: “Do not misuse the name of the <span>Lord<\/span> your God. The <span>Lord<\/span> will not let you go unpunished if you misuse his name” (Ex 20:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people of Israel were forbidden to swear their oaths by false gods (Jer 12:16; Am 8:14). To breach an international treaty, where the oath was taken in the Lord’s name, merited death (Ez 17:16-17). It was one of the complaints of Hosea that the people of his day swore falsely when they made a covenant (Hos 10:4). Judgment would attend such wanton disregard of the solemnity of an oath. Certain civil situations in Israel called for an oath (Ex 22:10-11; Lv 5:1; 6:3; Nm 5:11-28). This practice provided a pattern for the Israelite covenantal oath of allegiance between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>Christ taught that oaths were binding (Mt 5:33). In the kingdom of God oaths would become unnecessary (vv 34-37). At his trial before Caiaphas, Jesus heard an imprecatory oath from the high priest (26:63-65), and Paul swore by an oath on occasion (2 Cor 1:23; Gal 1:20). God himself was bound by his own oath (Heb 6:13-18) to keep his promise to the patriarchs (Gn 50:24; Pss 89:19-37, 49; 110:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; Vows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OATH Solemn vow or promise to fulfill a pledge. There are two terms in Hebrew that mean “oath”: ‘ala and sebu’a. The latter, more general term in ancient times meant to enter into a solemn (even magical) relationship with the number seven, although ancient connections are lost. Even so, when Abraham and Abimelech entered into an oath at Beersheba (the well of seven, or the well of the oath), Abraham set aside seven ewe lambs as a witness to the fact that he had dug a well (Gn 21:22-31). The f...","summary_en":"OATH Solemn vow or promise to fulfill a pledge. There are two terms in Hebrew that mean “oath”: ‘ala and sebu’a. The latter, more general term in ancient times meant to enter into a solemn (even magical) relationship with the number seven, although ancient connections are lost. Even so, when Abraham and Abimelech entered into an oath at Beersheba (the well of seven, or the well of the oath), Abraham set aside seven ewe lambs as a witness to the fact that he had dug a well (Gn 21:22-31). The f...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":28255,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44116,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:5","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:5<\/strong> The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always <em>20 percent.<\/em> Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:5<\/strong> The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always <em>20 percent.<\/em> Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:5 The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always 20 percent. Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.","summary_en":"6:5 The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always 20 percent. Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71742,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:5","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:5<\/strong> The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always <em>20 percent.<\/em> Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:5<\/strong> The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always <em>20 percent.<\/em> Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:5 The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always 20 percent. Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.","summary_en":"6:5 The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always 20 percent. Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99368,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:5","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:5<\/strong> The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always <em>20 percent.<\/em> Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:5<\/strong> The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always <em>20 percent.<\/em> Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:5 The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always 20 percent. Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.","summary_en":"6:5 The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always 20 percent. Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126994,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:5","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:5<\/strong> The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always <em>20 percent.<\/em> Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:5<\/strong> The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always <em>20 percent.<\/em> Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:5 The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always 20 percent. Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.","summary_en":"6:5 The instructions for the guilt offering assumed that a person’s conscience would induce voluntary reparation; when restitution was voluntary, the surcharge for loss of use to the owner was always 20 percent. Penalties were more severe in other cases (cp. Exod 22:1-15). There is a clear difference between voluntary confession and simply admitting sin after being caught.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":28257,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":44117,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:7","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:7<\/strong> <em>will purify you before the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>, making you right with him:<\/em> God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:7<\/strong> <em>will purify you before the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>, making you right with him:<\/em> God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:7 will purify you before the Lord, making you right with him: God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.","summary_en":"6:7 will purify you before the Lord, making you right with him: God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71743,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:7","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:7<\/strong> <em>will purify you before the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>, making you right with him:<\/em> God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:7<\/strong> <em>will purify you before the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>, making you right with him:<\/em> God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:7 will purify you before the Lord, making you right with him: God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.","summary_en":"6:7 will purify you before the Lord, making you right with him: God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99369,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:7","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:7<\/strong> <em>will purify you before the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>, making you right with him:<\/em> God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:7<\/strong> <em>will purify you before the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>, making you right with him:<\/em> God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:7 will purify you before the Lord, making you right with him: God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.","summary_en":"6:7 will purify you before the Lord, making you right with him: God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126995,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:7","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:7<\/strong> <em>will purify you before the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>, making you right with him:<\/em> God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:7<\/strong> <em>will purify you before the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em>, making you right with him:<\/em> God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:7 will purify you before the Lord, making you right with him: God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.","summary_en":"6:7 will purify you before the Lord, making you right with him: God graciously gave his people a way to atone for their sins. See also study notes on 1:4; 4:20.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":23089,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Leviticus","title_en":"Book of Leviticus","content_ro":"<h3>LEVITICUS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Third book of the OT, largely concerned with the duties of the Levitical priests.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>A traditional alternative title of Leviticus is the Third Book of Moses, which gives proper credit to the man who most deserves to be called its author. For though the book never says that Moses wrote down any of the material, it repeatedly states that God revealed the contents of Leviticus to Moses. It may be that Leviticus was not put into writing as soon as it was revealed, but there is little to commend the common critical view that it was composed nearly a thousand years after Moses. The spelling and grammar of Leviticus was, like other books of the OT, revised from time to time to make it understandable to later generations of Jewish readers, but that does not mean the essential content of the book was modified.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>God revealed some of the laws in Leviticus by speaking to Moses from the tent of meeting, or tabernacle (Lv 1:1). Other laws were revealed on Mt Sinai (26:46). Such statements show that Moses learned the contents of Leviticus after the tabernacle had been built but before the Israelites left Mt Sinai. This fits in with Exodus 40:17, which says that the tabernacle was erected exactly a year after the Israelites left Egypt. They then spent another month at Sinai, during which time the laws in Leviticus were given to Moses. Then one month later (Nm 1:1) Moses was commanded to prepare the people to leave Sinai to conquer the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to give an exact date for the Israelite exodus from Egypt. Dates at the end of the 15th century <span>BC<\/span> or early in the 13th century are put forward by different scholars. Whichever view is adopted, the origin of Leviticus must be one year later than the exodus. But certainty about the absolute date of Leviticus is unimportant so long as the religious setting of the book is understood.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>About 400 years before the exodus, God promised Abraham that his descendants would be very numerous and live in the land of Canaan. The family of Abraham multiplied, but as a result of famine they had to go and live in Egypt. Afraid of the Israelites, the rulers of Egypt turned them into slaves.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus tells how God, acting through Moses, brought the Israelites out of Egypt in a miraculous way. Moses led them to Mt Sinai, where God appeared in fire and smoke on the top of the mountain. Moses went up the mountain, and there God gave him the Ten Commandments and explained various laws. Through these acts God showed that he had chosen the nation of Israel to be his special holy people, different from all the other nations because they would show God’s character through their behavior (cf. Ex 19:5-6).<\/p>\n\n<p>God’s revelation at Sinai was unique and unrepeatable. But he disclosed to Moses that he wanted to live among the people of Israel permanently. They were told to build a portable royal palace that would be suitable for the divine King of kings. The building of this portable palace, traditionally called the tabernacle, is described in Exodus 35–40. When it was completed, the fire and cloud that had been seen on Mt Sinai appeared over the tabernacle as a sign that God was now dwelling in it (Ex 40:34-38).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus also tells how Moses was told to appoint his brother, Aaron, and Aaron’s sons to serve in the tabernacle as priests (Ex 28–29). Unfortunately, before the Israelites even began to build the tabernacle, they made a golden calf under Aaron’s leadership and started to worship it instead. The people were spared only as a result of Moses’ prayers. The book of Exodus therefore leaves the reader in suspense. The tabernacle has been built, but no one knows how to worship God in it. Though Aaron and his family are alive, we are left wondering whether they will still be allowed to lead the worship of God after the idolatry of the golden calf. The book of Leviticus answers this question.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheology\">Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>The Ten Commandments explain briefly and simply how God expects his people to behave. The first four commandments explain our duty toward our neighbor. The book of Leviticus follows a similar scheme. Chapters 1–17 show how God wanted Israel to worship him, while chapters 18–27 are mainly concerned with how people should behave toward each other. Whereas the Ten Commandments are general and can be applied quite easily to every society, the book of Leviticus is much more detailed and specifically geared to the special circumstances of ancient Israel. If modern readers are to profit from reading Leviticus, they must look behind the specific regulations to the underlying religious principles that do not change—in other words, to the theology of Leviticus.<\/p>\n<p>Four themes are very important in the theology of Leviticus: (1) the presence of God, (2) holiness, (3) sacrifice, and (4) the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>The Presence of God<\/h5>\n<p>God is always present with Israel in a real way. Sometimes his presence becomes visible in fire and smoke. But even when there is no miraculous sign, God is present. He is especially near when people worship him and offer sacrifice. The many animal sacrifices mentioned in the book are all brought to the Lord. When the animals are burnt, God is pleased with the smell (1:9). The priests who offer the sacrifices must be especially careful since they come closer to God than other people do. If they are careless in their duties and break God’s commands, they may die (10:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>God is present not just in worship but in all the ordinary duties of life. The recurring refrain of the later chapters, “I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, am your God” (18:2; 19:3), reminds the Israelites that every aspect of their life—religion (chs 21–24), sex (chs 18, 20), and relations with neighbors (chs 19, 25)—matters to God. The behavior of every Israelite must mirror that of God himself (20:7). The fear of God should prompt persons to help the blind, the deaf, the elderly, and the poor. Though such people may have no redress against unfair treatment, God cares about what happens to them (19:14, 32; 25:17, 36, 43).<\/p>\n<h5>Holiness<\/h5>\n<p>“You must be holy because I am holy” (11:44-45; 19:2; 20:26) could be termed the motto of Leviticus. “Holy,” “clean,” and “unclean” are common words in this book. God is the supremely holy person in the Bible, and holiness is the distinctive feature of his character. But earthly creatures can become holy too. To become holy, a person must be chosen by God and undergo the correct ceremony. Thus, at Sinai all Israel became a holy nation (Ex 19:6). Leviticus 8–9 explains how Aaron and his sons were ordained priests. This made them more holy than ordinary Israelites and therefore able to approach God and offer sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>Before anyone could become holy, they had to be “clean.” Cleanness in Leviticus means more than just being free of dirt, though this idea is included. It means being free of any abnormality. Whenever a person appears to fall short of perfection, he is described as “unclean.” Thus, the worst uncleanness is death, the very opposite of perfect life. But bleeding and other discharges and patchy skin diseases can make someone unclean. Animals that move in peculiar ways or have strange habits are also called unclean (Lv 11–15).<\/p>\n<p>Holiness and its opposite, uncleanness, can describe behavior as well as outward appearance. To be holy means to obey God and to act like God. Chapters 18–25 explain what holiness means in daily living. It means avoiding illicit sexual relations, caring for the poor, being honest, being fair, and loving your neighbor as yourself. This sort of behavior made Israel different from other peoples. Through their holiness the whole nation was supposed to demonstrate what God was like.<\/p>\n<h5>Sacrifice<\/h5>\n<p>In practice, unfortunately, the nation and the individuals within it rarely lived up to these ideals of holiness. Even if one did not commit a grievous sin, he or she was always liable to become unclean through contact with someone else, touching a dead animal, or in some other way. To maintain contact with a holy God, Israel’s sins and uncleanness had to be removed. This is what the sacrifices were for. They brought the forgiveness of sins and cleansing from uncleanness. Because sin affects relations between God and humans in various ways, Leviticus provides four different types of offerings to cover the different cases (Lv 1–6), and explains which sacrifices must be offered on which occasions (chs 7–17). All these rituals served to underline the seriousness of sin and helped preserve peace and fellowship between God and humanity.<\/p>\n<h5>The Sinai Covenant<\/h5>\n<p>All the laws contained in Leviticus form part of the Sinai covenant. They fill out and apply the principles of the Ten Commandments to the specific circumstances of ancient Israel. But they are more than a set of detailed rules, because they were given as part of the covenant. Three things have to be remembered about this covenant. First, the covenant created a personal relationship. The Lord became Israel’s king, and Israel became his special treasure set apart from the other nations of the world. Second, the covenant was based on God’s grace. He had made a promise to Abraham and, in saving the people from Egyptian slavery, he demonstrated his faithfulness to his promise and his love for Israel. Israel, in turn, was to show its gratitude for salvation by keeping the law. In no way did keeping the law earn them salvation. The law was given to a redeemed people. Finally, there were promises and threats built into the covenant (Lv 26). When the nation keeps the law, God promises they will enjoy good harvests, victory over their enemies, and God walking among them as he did in Eden. But if they reject God’s laws, terrible calamities will befall them: drought, famine, defeat, and even expulsion from the land God had promised to give them. These covenant curses form the background to the prophets’ warnings in later times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Kinds of Sacrifices (1–7)<\/h5>\n<p>These chapters explain how the different kinds of sacrifices were to be offered. Most of these sacrifices also formed part of the regular worship in the tabernacle and later in the temple. But these chapters are concerned with personal offerings made when someone had sinned or made a vow or recovered from an illness. They explain what the offerer must do and what the priest must do, which parts of the animal must be burned, which parts may be eaten by the priest, and what is to be done with the blood of the animal.<\/p>\n<p>First, the offerer brought the animal into the outer court of the tabernacle. In the presence of the priest he put his hand on the head of the animal and explained why he was bringing the sacrifice. Then the worshiper killed the animal and chopped it up. The priest then took over. He caught the blood as it ran out of the dying animal and splashed it over the altar, and burned at least some of the animal on the great altar in the court of the tabernacle. These acts were performed with all the animal sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>The special feature of the burnt offering (Lv 1) was that the whole animal, which had to be unblemished, was burned on the altar. All that the priest received was the skin. This was the most common sacrifice and was offered on many different occasions. In giving the whole animal to God in the sacrifice, the worshiper dedicated himself or herself totally to God’s service. “Lay your hand on its head so the <span>Lord<\/span> will accept it as your substitute, thus making atonement for you” (1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 2 deals with the grain offering that always accompanied the burnt offering, but which could also be offered alone. Only part of this offering was burned; the rest was given to the priests to eat. The sacrifices formed an important part of their income.<\/p>\n<p>The peace (fellowship) offering’s special feature was that it was the only sacrifice where the offerer was allowed to eat part of the meat (Lv 3). Since in the earliest period Israelites were not permitted to kill animals except for sacrifice (ch 17), every meal that included meat had to be preceded by a peace offering. Leviticus 7:11-18 mentions three occasions that might prompt a peace-offering “thanksgiving”: when someone had something to praise God for or some sin to acknowledge; a vow promising a sacrifice if God would help one out of a difficulty; and a voluntary offering, made just because the person felt like it.<\/p>\n<p>Despite its name, the sin offering (Lv 4) was not the only offering dealing with sin. The other sacrifices also made the forgiveness of sin possible. The special significance of this sacrifice is emphasized by its unusual ritual. Instead of the blood being splashed over the altar, as in the other sacrifices, it was carefully smeared over the horns (corners) of the large altar in the courtyard (4:30) or over the small altar inside the holy place (v 18); once a year the blood was sprinkled over the ark in the Holy of Holies (16:14). Sin makes these different parts of the tabernacle unclean, unfit for the presence of God. And if God is not present in the tabernacle, worship has no point. The blood acts as a spiritual disinfectant, making the tabernacle clean and holy again. The sin offering was required whenever a person inadvertently broke one of the commandments or had suffered from a discharge or skin disease that made him or her unclean for a week or more (chs 12, 15).<\/p>\n<p>The guilt offering (5:14–6:7) was for more serious offenses, such as stealing holy property or deliberately using God’s name in a false oath. Such an offense was seen as robbing God. Therefore, a ram had to be offered as a sort of repayment. Whereas the poor person could offer just a bird for the other sacrifices, a ram was always required for a guilt offering.<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 6:8–7:38 contain various other regulations about sacrifice, mainly specifying how much of each sacrifice the priests may eat and how much must be burned. One important rule for those who weren’t priests was that they were not to eat any fat or blood or eat sacrificial meat when they were unclean. If they did, they could be cut off from Israel (7:21-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Beginnings of the Priesthood (8–10)<\/h5>\n<p>Though Leviticus looks like a law book, because it contains so many regulations, it is really a history book describing the events that occurred about a year after the exodus. These chapters remind us of the true character of the book, for they tell how Moses ordained Aaron and his sons to be priests and how they offered their first sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>Awed by the complexity of the ordination rituals, the modern reader may miss the marvel that Aaron should have been appointed high priest. For it was Aaron who had presided over the making of the golden calf and encouraged its worship (Ex 32). Had not Moses interceded for Israel, the whole nation would have been destroyed in the wilderness. Here the gracious forgiveness of God is most clear. Aaron, the chief sinner, is appointed chief mediator between God and the people. In the NT the career of Peter parallels Aaron’s in some respect.<\/p>\n<p>The greatness of the high priesthood is symbolized by the richly decorated robes Aaron wore. He and his sons were anointed with oil, and then Moses offered the three most common sacrifices on their behalf. They were confined to the court of the tabernacle for a week, and it seems likely that some of the rituals were repeated each day. By this means they were set apart from the rest of the people and entirely consecrated to their holy office.<\/p>\n<p>By the eighth day the process was complete. Now Aaron and his sons could offer sacrifice. This time, Moses only told them what to do; he did not offer sacrifices himself. Chapter 9 concludes by telling that, after they had offered the sacrifices for themselves and the people, fire came out of the tabernacle to burn up the offerings, thereby displaying God’s approval of their actions.<\/p>\n<p>After this, 10:1-2 presents an unexpected turn of events: “Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu put coals of fire in their incense burners and sprinkled incense over it. In this way, they disobeyed the <span>Lord<\/span> by burning before him a different kind of fire than he had commanded. So fire blazed forth from the <span>Lord<\/span>’s presence and burned them up, and they died there before the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). We do not know exactly what is meant by unholy fire. What is important is that the priests did something that God had not commanded them. The priests were supposed to set an example of total obedience to God’s word: this is the essence of holiness. Instead, they decided to follow their own plans and the consequences were dire.<\/p>\n<p>“Aaron was silent” (10:3). He was warned not even to mourn his sons’ deaths, lest he be suspected of condoning their sin (vv 6-7). Yet, despite his sons’ actions, Aaron and his surviving sons were confirmed as priests. They were reminded that their job was “to distinguish between what is holy and what is ordinary, what is ceremonially unclean and what is clean. And you must teach the Israelites all the laws that the <span>Lord<\/span> has given through Moses” (vv 10-11, <span>nlt<\/span>). The chapter closes on another note of grace. Although the priests made a mistake in offering one of the sin offerings, God would overlook it on this occasion.<\/p>\n<h5>Cleanness and Uncleanness (11–16)<\/h5>\n<p>Distinguishing between the unclean and the clean is the theme of chapters 11–15, which prepare for the great Day of Atonement ceremonies of chapter 16. These are designed to cleanse the tabernacle from the uncleannesses of the people of Israel, thereby ensuring that God would continue to dwell among them (16:16, 19).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 11 discusses unclean animals, that is, animals that may not be eaten. Land animals are dealt with first, then fish and birds, and finally various miscellaneous creatures such as locusts and reptiles. To be clean, a land animal must have cloven hooves and chew the cud; that covers sheep and cattle but excludes pigs and camels. Fish must have fins and scales to be edible; without them, they count as unclean. Birds are clean unless they are birds of prey or scavengers that eat carrion. Insects that resemble birds in having wings and two large legs to hop with—for example, locusts—are clean. Other flying insects are unclean. All squirming creatures that dart hither and thither, such as lizards, are unclean.<\/p>\n<p>The reasons for declaring some animals clean and others unclean has long been a great puzzle. One suggestion is that the unclean animals were used in sacrifice by pagan worshipers or were thought to represent pagan deities. Certainly some unclean animals were used in pagan worship, but so were some clean ones, and that fact makes this explanation unsatisfactory. A second possibility is that the rules were hygienic: the clean animals were safe to eat whereas the unclean were not. There may be some truth in this explanation, but it is not completely adequate, for some clean animals can be harmful while some unclean ones are all right to eat.<\/p>\n<p>Unclean animals could not be eaten, but there was no harm in touching them. Israelites could ride camels, for example. However, all dead animals, unless killed for sacrifice, were unclean. Anyone who touched the carcass of a dead creature became unclean himself and therefore could not enter the tabernacle that day (11:39-40).<\/p>\n<p>The following chapters deal with other conditions that make people unclean. Chapter 12 states that childbirth, or more precisely the bloody discharge that follows childbirth, makes a woman unclean. In OT theology death is the ultimate uncleanness, and conditions that are abnormal or threaten to lead to death are also unclean. When the discharge has ceased, after a fixed period the mother must bring a burnt offering and a sin offering to atone for any sin she may have committed, and to purify the tabernacle that may have been polluted through her uncleanness.<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 13–14 deal with the uncleanness caused by skin diseases. Detailed regulations are given to distinguish between different diseases so that the priests can decide whether people are unclean or not. If they are unclean, they must live outside the camp until their skin heals. Traditionally the unclean skin disease has been called leprosy. But this is unlikely to be correct, since leprosy was unknown in the Middle East in OT times. Rather, it was any disease that led to the skin peeling off in patches, such as psoriasis. This explains why the disease might spontaneously get better.<\/p>\n<p>If the disease did retreat sufficiently, the sufferer could call the priest, and if the priest was satisfied with the cure, the sufferer could be readmitted to the community after following the rituals prescribed in chapter 14. This also explains what is to be done if patches of mold are found in pieces of cloth or house walls.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 15 explains how men can become unclean through discharges from their sexual organs, due to gonorrhea or sexual intercourse, while women become unclean through menstruation or a long-term discharge. Part of the purpose of these regulations is to prevent the sacred prostitution that was common in the ancient world. Since sexual intercourse made people unclean, they could not go to worship immediately afterward. Further, the uncleanness of menstruation should have discouraged men from being overfamiliar with unmarried girls.<\/p>\n<p>The broad scope of these uncleanness regulations meant that nearly every Israelite would be unclean at some time in his or her life. This uncleanness could contaminate God’s dwelling place, the tabernacle, making it impossible for God to continue to live there. To avert this catastrophe, a Day of Atonement was held once a year. This is the most solemn day in the Jewish calendar, and the ceremonies for it are described in detail in Leviticus 16.<\/p>\n<p>There are three acts on the Day of Atonement that are described in this chapter. There was first the special sin offering offered by the high priest, in the course of which the outer altar of burnt offering, the incense altar inside the Holy Place, and finally the ark itself in the Holy of Holies were sprinkled with blood to purify each part of the tabernacle. This was the one occasion in the year when the high priest entered the presence of God in the Holy of Holies, and elaborate precautions were taken to screen the high priest from God’s holiness (16:2-4, 11-17). There was another public act that pictured the sins of Israel being taken away. A goat was chosen by lot. Then the high priest placed his hands on its head and recited over it the nation’s sin. This goat was then led away and driven into a solitary place; in later times it was pushed over a precipice. These actions pictured Israel’s sins being carried away, so that they could not disturb the peace between God and his people. The third important feature of the Day of Atonement was public prayer and fasting. This showed that sin could not be eliminated without effort, but only through a complete change of heart by every person in Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>Rules for Daily Life (17–25)<\/h5>\n<p>Whereas the opening chapters of Leviticus are entirely concerned with the Godward side of religion, the later chapters are more concerned with practical religious duties toward other persons. However, chapter 17 repeats some of the rules about sacrifice and makes one new one: that all sacrifice must be offered in the tabernacle courtyard. This was to prevent people from secretly worshiping heathen gods.<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 18 and 20 spell out the rules governing sexual relations in ancient Israel. Chapter 19 gives further examples of what holiness means in everyday life. Positively, it means helping the poor by leaving some grain behind in the fields at harvesttime (19:9-10); paying people promptly (v 13); avoiding gossip (v 16); honoring the elderly, helping the immigrant, and being honest in business (vv 32-36). But holiness goes beyond deeds and words. It should transform thoughts: “Never seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone, but love your neighbor as yourself” (v 18, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 21 and 22 discuss how the holy men of Israel, the priests, are to demonstrate their holiness in their lives. First, they must avoid approaching dead bodies unless the dead are very close relatives. Second, they must marry women of known moral uprightness. Third, deformed priests—for example, a blind or lame priest—may never offer sacrifices. Here the principle is plain that men who represent God must reflect the perfection of God in normal, healthy bodies. However, those who are temporarily unclean, through skin disease or a discharge, may resume their duties as soon as their uncleanness is cured.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 23 lists the main holy days and the sacrifices that had to be offered on each one. Chapter 24 deals with the lamp and special bread kept within the tabernacle. A case of blasphemy that occurred in the wilderness is mentioned. Because the man actually used the sacred name of God in a curse, he was sentenced to death.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 25 deals with the jubilee year. In every society people fall into debt. Today the effects of debt are somewhat cushioned by state welfare payments and bank overdrafts, but ancient societies did not have such aid available. People in debt had to sell off their family land, on which they depended for their living, or in more serious situations, they could sell themselves into slavery. Once impoverished in this way, it was exceedingly difficult ever to recover one’s land or one’s freedom. But this law in Leviticus provided an escape. Every 50 years was a jubilee. In this year every slave was released from bondage, and everyone who had sold his land was given it back free. Thus, everyone who fell into debt was given a chance to make a fresh start. Though this law was primarily designed to help the poor, it also served to prevent the accumulation of too much wealth in the hands of a few rich men.<\/p>\n<h5>Blessings, Curses, and Vows (26–27)<\/h5>\n<p>Chapter 26 contains the blessings and curses that traditionally concluded a covenant. Israel is promised great material and spiritual prosperity if she keeps the law but is warned that tragedy will befall if she is disobedient.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 27 is an appendix dealing with vows and other gifts made to God. When a person promises to give something to God, it becomes holy and cannot be retracted unless a suitable payment is made instead. This chapter sets out the rules about such dedications.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Aaron; Moses; Offerings and Sacrifices; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LEVITICUS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Third book of the OT, largely concerned with the duties of the Levitical priests.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>A traditional alternative title of Leviticus is the Third Book of Moses, which gives proper credit to the man who most deserves to be called its author. For though the book never says that Moses wrote down any of the material, it repeatedly states that God revealed the contents of Leviticus to Moses. It may be that Leviticus was not put into writing as soon as it was revealed, but there is little to commend the common critical view that it was composed nearly a thousand years after Moses. The spelling and grammar of Leviticus was, like other books of the OT, revised from time to time to make it understandable to later generations of Jewish readers, but that does not mean the essential content of the book was modified.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>God revealed some of the laws in Leviticus by speaking to Moses from the tent of meeting, or tabernacle (Lv 1:1). Other laws were revealed on Mt Sinai (26:46). Such statements show that Moses learned the contents of Leviticus after the tabernacle had been built but before the Israelites left Mt Sinai. This fits in with Exodus 40:17, which says that the tabernacle was erected exactly a year after the Israelites left Egypt. They then spent another month at Sinai, during which time the laws in Leviticus were given to Moses. Then one month later (Nm 1:1) Moses was commanded to prepare the people to leave Sinai to conquer the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to give an exact date for the Israelite exodus from Egypt. Dates at the end of the 15th century <span>BC<\/span> or early in the 13th century are put forward by different scholars. Whichever view is adopted, the origin of Leviticus must be one year later than the exodus. But certainty about the absolute date of Leviticus is unimportant so long as the religious setting of the book is understood.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>About 400 years before the exodus, God promised Abraham that his descendants would be very numerous and live in the land of Canaan. The family of Abraham multiplied, but as a result of famine they had to go and live in Egypt. Afraid of the Israelites, the rulers of Egypt turned them into slaves.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus tells how God, acting through Moses, brought the Israelites out of Egypt in a miraculous way. Moses led them to Mt Sinai, where God appeared in fire and smoke on the top of the mountain. Moses went up the mountain, and there God gave him the Ten Commandments and explained various laws. Through these acts God showed that he had chosen the nation of Israel to be his special holy people, different from all the other nations because they would show God’s character through their behavior (cf. Ex 19:5-6).<\/p>\n\n<p>God’s revelation at Sinai was unique and unrepeatable. But he disclosed to Moses that he wanted to live among the people of Israel permanently. They were told to build a portable royal palace that would be suitable for the divine King of kings. The building of this portable palace, traditionally called the tabernacle, is described in Exodus 35–40. When it was completed, the fire and cloud that had been seen on Mt Sinai appeared over the tabernacle as a sign that God was now dwelling in it (Ex 40:34-38).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus also tells how Moses was told to appoint his brother, Aaron, and Aaron’s sons to serve in the tabernacle as priests (Ex 28–29). Unfortunately, before the Israelites even began to build the tabernacle, they made a golden calf under Aaron’s leadership and started to worship it instead. The people were spared only as a result of Moses’ prayers. The book of Exodus therefore leaves the reader in suspense. The tabernacle has been built, but no one knows how to worship God in it. Though Aaron and his family are alive, we are left wondering whether they will still be allowed to lead the worship of God after the idolatry of the golden calf. The book of Leviticus answers this question.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheology\">Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>The Ten Commandments explain briefly and simply how God expects his people to behave. The first four commandments explain our duty toward our neighbor. The book of Leviticus follows a similar scheme. Chapters 1–17 show how God wanted Israel to worship him, while chapters 18–27 are mainly concerned with how people should behave toward each other. Whereas the Ten Commandments are general and can be applied quite easily to every society, the book of Leviticus is much more detailed and specifically geared to the special circumstances of ancient Israel. If modern readers are to profit from reading Leviticus, they must look behind the specific regulations to the underlying religious principles that do not change—in other words, to the theology of Leviticus.<\/p>\n<p>Four themes are very important in the theology of Leviticus: (1) the presence of God, (2) holiness, (3) sacrifice, and (4) the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>The Presence of God<\/h5>\n<p>God is always present with Israel in a real way. Sometimes his presence becomes visible in fire and smoke. But even when there is no miraculous sign, God is present. He is especially near when people worship him and offer sacrifice. The many animal sacrifices mentioned in the book are all brought to the Lord. When the animals are burnt, God is pleased with the smell (1:9). The priests who offer the sacrifices must be especially careful since they come closer to God than other people do. If they are careless in their duties and break God’s commands, they may die (10:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>God is present not just in worship but in all the ordinary duties of life. The recurring refrain of the later chapters, “I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, am your God” (18:2; 19:3), reminds the Israelites that every aspect of their life—religion (chs 21–24), sex (chs 18, 20), and relations with neighbors (chs 19, 25)—matters to God. The behavior of every Israelite must mirror that of God himself (20:7). The fear of God should prompt persons to help the blind, the deaf, the elderly, and the poor. Though such people may have no redress against unfair treatment, God cares about what happens to them (19:14, 32; 25:17, 36, 43).<\/p>\n<h5>Holiness<\/h5>\n<p>“You must be holy because I am holy” (11:44-45; 19:2; 20:26) could be termed the motto of Leviticus. “Holy,” “clean,” and “unclean” are common words in this book. God is the supremely holy person in the Bible, and holiness is the distinctive feature of his character. But earthly creatures can become holy too. To become holy, a person must be chosen by God and undergo the correct ceremony. Thus, at Sinai all Israel became a holy nation (Ex 19:6). Leviticus 8–9 explains how Aaron and his sons were ordained priests. This made them more holy than ordinary Israelites and therefore able to approach God and offer sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>Before anyone could become holy, they had to be “clean.” Cleanness in Leviticus means more than just being free of dirt, though this idea is included. It means being free of any abnormality. Whenever a person appears to fall short of perfection, he is described as “unclean.” Thus, the worst uncleanness is death, the very opposite of perfect life. But bleeding and other discharges and patchy skin diseases can make someone unclean. Animals that move in peculiar ways or have strange habits are also called unclean (Lv 11–15).<\/p>\n<p>Holiness and its opposite, uncleanness, can describe behavior as well as outward appearance. To be holy means to obey God and to act like God. Chapters 18–25 explain what holiness means in daily living. It means avoiding illicit sexual relations, caring for the poor, being honest, being fair, and loving your neighbor as yourself. This sort of behavior made Israel different from other peoples. Through their holiness the whole nation was supposed to demonstrate what God was like.<\/p>\n<h5>Sacrifice<\/h5>\n<p>In practice, unfortunately, the nation and the individuals within it rarely lived up to these ideals of holiness. Even if one did not commit a grievous sin, he or she was always liable to become unclean through contact with someone else, touching a dead animal, or in some other way. To maintain contact with a holy God, Israel’s sins and uncleanness had to be removed. This is what the sacrifices were for. They brought the forgiveness of sins and cleansing from uncleanness. Because sin affects relations between God and humans in various ways, Leviticus provides four different types of offerings to cover the different cases (Lv 1–6), and explains which sacrifices must be offered on which occasions (chs 7–17). All these rituals served to underline the seriousness of sin and helped preserve peace and fellowship between God and humanity.<\/p>\n<h5>The Sinai Covenant<\/h5>\n<p>All the laws contained in Leviticus form part of the Sinai covenant. They fill out and apply the principles of the Ten Commandments to the specific circumstances of ancient Israel. But they are more than a set of detailed rules, because they were given as part of the covenant. Three things have to be remembered about this covenant. First, the covenant created a personal relationship. The Lord became Israel’s king, and Israel became his special treasure set apart from the other nations of the world. Second, the covenant was based on God’s grace. He had made a promise to Abraham and, in saving the people from Egyptian slavery, he demonstrated his faithfulness to his promise and his love for Israel. Israel, in turn, was to show its gratitude for salvation by keeping the law. In no way did keeping the law earn them salvation. The law was given to a redeemed people. Finally, there were promises and threats built into the covenant (Lv 26). When the nation keeps the law, God promises they will enjoy good harvests, victory over their enemies, and God walking among them as he did in Eden. But if they reject God’s laws, terrible calamities will befall them: drought, famine, defeat, and even expulsion from the land God had promised to give them. These covenant curses form the background to the prophets’ warnings in later times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Kinds of Sacrifices (1–7)<\/h5>\n<p>These chapters explain how the different kinds of sacrifices were to be offered. Most of these sacrifices also formed part of the regular worship in the tabernacle and later in the temple. But these chapters are concerned with personal offerings made when someone had sinned or made a vow or recovered from an illness. They explain what the offerer must do and what the priest must do, which parts of the animal must be burned, which parts may be eaten by the priest, and what is to be done with the blood of the animal.<\/p>\n<p>First, the offerer brought the animal into the outer court of the tabernacle. In the presence of the priest he put his hand on the head of the animal and explained why he was bringing the sacrifice. Then the worshiper killed the animal and chopped it up. The priest then took over. He caught the blood as it ran out of the dying animal and splashed it over the altar, and burned at least some of the animal on the great altar in the court of the tabernacle. These acts were performed with all the animal sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>The special feature of the burnt offering (Lv 1) was that the whole animal, which had to be unblemished, was burned on the altar. All that the priest received was the skin. This was the most common sacrifice and was offered on many different occasions. In giving the whole animal to God in the sacrifice, the worshiper dedicated himself or herself totally to God’s service. “Lay your hand on its head so the <span>Lord<\/span> will accept it as your substitute, thus making atonement for you” (1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 2 deals with the grain offering that always accompanied the burnt offering, but which could also be offered alone. Only part of this offering was burned; the rest was given to the priests to eat. The sacrifices formed an important part of their income.<\/p>\n<p>The peace (fellowship) offering’s special feature was that it was the only sacrifice where the offerer was allowed to eat part of the meat (Lv 3). Since in the earliest period Israelites were not permitted to kill animals except for sacrifice (ch 17), every meal that included meat had to be preceded by a peace offering. Leviticus 7:11-18 mentions three occasions that might prompt a peace-offering “thanksgiving”: when someone had something to praise God for or some sin to acknowledge; a vow promising a sacrifice if God would help one out of a difficulty; and a voluntary offering, made just because the person felt like it.<\/p>\n<p>Despite its name, the sin offering (Lv 4) was not the only offering dealing with sin. The other sacrifices also made the forgiveness of sin possible. The special significance of this sacrifice is emphasized by its unusual ritual. Instead of the blood being splashed over the altar, as in the other sacrifices, it was carefully smeared over the horns (corners) of the large altar in the courtyard (4:30) or over the small altar inside the holy place (v 18); once a year the blood was sprinkled over the ark in the Holy of Holies (16:14). Sin makes these different parts of the tabernacle unclean, unfit for the presence of God. And if God is not present in the tabernacle, worship has no point. The blood acts as a spiritual disinfectant, making the tabernacle clean and holy again. The sin offering was required whenever a person inadvertently broke one of the commandments or had suffered from a discharge or skin disease that made him or her unclean for a week or more (chs 12, 15).<\/p>\n<p>The guilt offering (5:14–6:7) was for more serious offenses, such as stealing holy property or deliberately using God’s name in a false oath. Such an offense was seen as robbing God. Therefore, a ram had to be offered as a sort of repayment. Whereas the poor person could offer just a bird for the other sacrifices, a ram was always required for a guilt offering.<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 6:8–7:38 contain various other regulations about sacrifice, mainly specifying how much of each sacrifice the priests may eat and how much must be burned. One important rule for those who weren’t priests was that they were not to eat any fat or blood or eat sacrificial meat when they were unclean. If they did, they could be cut off from Israel (7:21-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Beginnings of the Priesthood (8–10)<\/h5>\n<p>Though Leviticus looks like a law book, because it contains so many regulations, it is really a history book describing the events that occurred about a year after the exodus. These chapters remind us of the true character of the book, for they tell how Moses ordained Aaron and his sons to be priests and how they offered their first sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>Awed by the complexity of the ordination rituals, the modern reader may miss the marvel that Aaron should have been appointed high priest. For it was Aaron who had presided over the making of the golden calf and encouraged its worship (Ex 32). Had not Moses interceded for Israel, the whole nation would have been destroyed in the wilderness. Here the gracious forgiveness of God is most clear. Aaron, the chief sinner, is appointed chief mediator between God and the people. In the NT the career of Peter parallels Aaron’s in some respect.<\/p>\n<p>The greatness of the high priesthood is symbolized by the richly decorated robes Aaron wore. He and his sons were anointed with oil, and then Moses offered the three most common sacrifices on their behalf. They were confined to the court of the tabernacle for a week, and it seems likely that some of the rituals were repeated each day. By this means they were set apart from the rest of the people and entirely consecrated to their holy office.<\/p>\n<p>By the eighth day the process was complete. Now Aaron and his sons could offer sacrifice. This time, Moses only told them what to do; he did not offer sacrifices himself. Chapter 9 concludes by telling that, after they had offered the sacrifices for themselves and the people, fire came out of the tabernacle to burn up the offerings, thereby displaying God’s approval of their actions.<\/p>\n<p>After this, 10:1-2 presents an unexpected turn of events: “Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu put coals of fire in their incense burners and sprinkled incense over it. In this way, they disobeyed the <span>Lord<\/span> by burning before him a different kind of fire than he had commanded. So fire blazed forth from the <span>Lord<\/span>’s presence and burned them up, and they died there before the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). We do not know exactly what is meant by unholy fire. What is important is that the priests did something that God had not commanded them. The priests were supposed to set an example of total obedience to God’s word: this is the essence of holiness. Instead, they decided to follow their own plans and the consequences were dire.<\/p>\n<p>“Aaron was silent” (10:3). He was warned not even to mourn his sons’ deaths, lest he be suspected of condoning their sin (vv 6-7). Yet, despite his sons’ actions, Aaron and his surviving sons were confirmed as priests. They were reminded that their job was “to distinguish between what is holy and what is ordinary, what is ceremonially unclean and what is clean. And you must teach the Israelites all the laws that the <span>Lord<\/span> has given through Moses” (vv 10-11, <span>nlt<\/span>). The chapter closes on another note of grace. Although the priests made a mistake in offering one of the sin offerings, God would overlook it on this occasion.<\/p>\n<h5>Cleanness and Uncleanness (11–16)<\/h5>\n<p>Distinguishing between the unclean and the clean is the theme of chapters 11–15, which prepare for the great Day of Atonement ceremonies of chapter 16. These are designed to cleanse the tabernacle from the uncleannesses of the people of Israel, thereby ensuring that God would continue to dwell among them (16:16, 19).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 11 discusses unclean animals, that is, animals that may not be eaten. Land animals are dealt with first, then fish and birds, and finally various miscellaneous creatures such as locusts and reptiles. To be clean, a land animal must have cloven hooves and chew the cud; that covers sheep and cattle but excludes pigs and camels. Fish must have fins and scales to be edible; without them, they count as unclean. Birds are clean unless they are birds of prey or scavengers that eat carrion. Insects that resemble birds in having wings and two large legs to hop with—for example, locusts—are clean. Other flying insects are unclean. All squirming creatures that dart hither and thither, such as lizards, are unclean.<\/p>\n<p>The reasons for declaring some animals clean and others unclean has long been a great puzzle. One suggestion is that the unclean animals were used in sacrifice by pagan worshipers or were thought to represent pagan deities. Certainly some unclean animals were used in pagan worship, but so were some clean ones, and that fact makes this explanation unsatisfactory. A second possibility is that the rules were hygienic: the clean animals were safe to eat whereas the unclean were not. There may be some truth in this explanation, but it is not completely adequate, for some clean animals can be harmful while some unclean ones are all right to eat.<\/p>\n<p>Unclean animals could not be eaten, but there was no harm in touching them. Israelites could ride camels, for example. However, all dead animals, unless killed for sacrifice, were unclean. Anyone who touched the carcass of a dead creature became unclean himself and therefore could not enter the tabernacle that day (11:39-40).<\/p>\n<p>The following chapters deal with other conditions that make people unclean. Chapter 12 states that childbirth, or more precisely the bloody discharge that follows childbirth, makes a woman unclean. In OT theology death is the ultimate uncleanness, and conditions that are abnormal or threaten to lead to death are also unclean. When the discharge has ceased, after a fixed period the mother must bring a burnt offering and a sin offering to atone for any sin she may have committed, and to purify the tabernacle that may have been polluted through her uncleanness.<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 13–14 deal with the uncleanness caused by skin diseases. Detailed regulations are given to distinguish between different diseases so that the priests can decide whether people are unclean or not. If they are unclean, they must live outside the camp until their skin heals. Traditionally the unclean skin disease has been called leprosy. But this is unlikely to be correct, since leprosy was unknown in the Middle East in OT times. Rather, it was any disease that led to the skin peeling off in patches, such as psoriasis. This explains why the disease might spontaneously get better.<\/p>\n<p>If the disease did retreat sufficiently, the sufferer could call the priest, and if the priest was satisfied with the cure, the sufferer could be readmitted to the community after following the rituals prescribed in chapter 14. This also explains what is to be done if patches of mold are found in pieces of cloth or house walls.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 15 explains how men can become unclean through discharges from their sexual organs, due to gonorrhea or sexual intercourse, while women become unclean through menstruation or a long-term discharge. Part of the purpose of these regulations is to prevent the sacred prostitution that was common in the ancient world. Since sexual intercourse made people unclean, they could not go to worship immediately afterward. Further, the uncleanness of menstruation should have discouraged men from being overfamiliar with unmarried girls.<\/p>\n<p>The broad scope of these uncleanness regulations meant that nearly every Israelite would be unclean at some time in his or her life. This uncleanness could contaminate God’s dwelling place, the tabernacle, making it impossible for God to continue to live there. To avert this catastrophe, a Day of Atonement was held once a year. This is the most solemn day in the Jewish calendar, and the ceremonies for it are described in detail in Leviticus 16.<\/p>\n<p>There are three acts on the Day of Atonement that are described in this chapter. There was first the special sin offering offered by the high priest, in the course of which the outer altar of burnt offering, the incense altar inside the Holy Place, and finally the ark itself in the Holy of Holies were sprinkled with blood to purify each part of the tabernacle. This was the one occasion in the year when the high priest entered the presence of God in the Holy of Holies, and elaborate precautions were taken to screen the high priest from God’s holiness (16:2-4, 11-17). There was another public act that pictured the sins of Israel being taken away. A goat was chosen by lot. Then the high priest placed his hands on its head and recited over it the nation’s sin. This goat was then led away and driven into a solitary place; in later times it was pushed over a precipice. These actions pictured Israel’s sins being carried away, so that they could not disturb the peace between God and his people. The third important feature of the Day of Atonement was public prayer and fasting. This showed that sin could not be eliminated without effort, but only through a complete change of heart by every person in Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>Rules for Daily Life (17–25)<\/h5>\n<p>Whereas the opening chapters of Leviticus are entirely concerned with the Godward side of religion, the later chapters are more concerned with practical religious duties toward other persons. However, chapter 17 repeats some of the rules about sacrifice and makes one new one: that all sacrifice must be offered in the tabernacle courtyard. This was to prevent people from secretly worshiping heathen gods.<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 18 and 20 spell out the rules governing sexual relations in ancient Israel. Chapter 19 gives further examples of what holiness means in everyday life. Positively, it means helping the poor by leaving some grain behind in the fields at harvesttime (19:9-10); paying people promptly (v 13); avoiding gossip (v 16); honoring the elderly, helping the immigrant, and being honest in business (vv 32-36). But holiness goes beyond deeds and words. It should transform thoughts: “Never seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone, but love your neighbor as yourself” (v 18, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 21 and 22 discuss how the holy men of Israel, the priests, are to demonstrate their holiness in their lives. First, they must avoid approaching dead bodies unless the dead are very close relatives. Second, they must marry women of known moral uprightness. Third, deformed priests—for example, a blind or lame priest—may never offer sacrifices. Here the principle is plain that men who represent God must reflect the perfection of God in normal, healthy bodies. However, those who are temporarily unclean, through skin disease or a discharge, may resume their duties as soon as their uncleanness is cured.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 23 lists the main holy days and the sacrifices that had to be offered on each one. Chapter 24 deals with the lamp and special bread kept within the tabernacle. A case of blasphemy that occurred in the wilderness is mentioned. Because the man actually used the sacred name of God in a curse, he was sentenced to death.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 25 deals with the jubilee year. In every society people fall into debt. Today the effects of debt are somewhat cushioned by state welfare payments and bank overdrafts, but ancient societies did not have such aid available. People in debt had to sell off their family land, on which they depended for their living, or in more serious situations, they could sell themselves into slavery. Once impoverished in this way, it was exceedingly difficult ever to recover one’s land or one’s freedom. But this law in Leviticus provided an escape. Every 50 years was a jubilee. In this year every slave was released from bondage, and everyone who had sold his land was given it back free. Thus, everyone who fell into debt was given a chance to make a fresh start. Though this law was primarily designed to help the poor, it also served to prevent the accumulation of too much wealth in the hands of a few rich men.<\/p>\n<h5>Blessings, Curses, and Vows (26–27)<\/h5>\n<p>Chapter 26 contains the blessings and curses that traditionally concluded a covenant. Israel is promised great material and spiritual prosperity if she keeps the law but is warned that tragedy will befall if she is disobedient.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 27 is an appendix dealing with vows and other gifts made to God. When a person promises to give something to God, it becomes holy and cannot be retracted unless a suitable payment is made instead. This chapter sets out the rules about such dedications.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Aaron; Moses; Offerings and Sacrifices; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LEVITICUS, Book of Third book of the OT, largely concerned with the duties of the Levitical priests. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Purpose and Theology • Content Author A traditional alternative title of Leviticus is the Third Book of Moses, which gives proper credit to the man who most deserves to be called its author. For though the book never says that Moses wrote down any of the material, it repeatedly states that God revealed the contents of Leviticus to Moses. It may be that Le...","summary_en":"LEVITICUS, Book of Third book of the OT, largely concerned with the duties of the Levitical priests. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Purpose and Theology • Content Author A traditional alternative title of Leviticus is the Third Book of Moses, which gives proper credit to the man who most deserves to be called its author. For though the book never says that Moses wrote down any of the material, it repeatedly states that God revealed the contents of Leviticus to Moses. It may be that Le...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28175,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44118,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:8","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:8–7:38<\/strong> The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:8–7:38<\/strong> The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:8–7:38 The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).","summary_en":"6:8–7:38 The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71744,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:8","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:8–7:38<\/strong> The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:8–7:38<\/strong> The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:8–7:38 The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).","summary_en":"6:8–7:38 The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99370,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:8","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:8–7:38<\/strong> The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:8–7:38<\/strong> The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:8–7:38 The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).","summary_en":"6:8–7:38 The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126996,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:8","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:8–7:38<\/strong> The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:8–7:38<\/strong> The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:8–7:38 The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).","summary_en":"6:8–7:38 The regulations in 1:2–6:7 include instructions for both priest and layperson. This section adds detail regarding the rights and obligations of the officiating priest. Because the tribe of Levi had been allotted no land for farming (Deut 18:1; Josh 13:14, 33), priests depended on the offering system for their income. The concern was that priests be adequately provided for. Like many human institutions, this system was eventually abused (1 Sam 2:12-25; Hos 4:8).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":60374,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Instructions","title_en":"God’s Instructions","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","summary_en":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88000,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Instructions","title_en":"God’s Instructions","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","summary_en":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115626,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Instructions","title_en":"God’s Instructions","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","summary_en":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143252,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Instructions","title_en":"God’s Instructions","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","summary_en":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":2966,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ashes","title_en":"Ashes","content_ro":"<h3>ASHES<\/h3>\n<p>Fine powder left after something has been thoroughly burned. The burning of sacrificial offerings on the tabernacle or temple altar produced ashes that were disposed of ceremonially (Lv 1:16; 4:12; 6:10-11; cf. Heb 9:13). The ashes on pagan altars figured in several OT accounts (1 Kgs 13:1-5; 2 Kgs 23:4). Ashes thrown into the air by Moses during the contest of God with the Egyptian pharaoh spread like fine dust over all the land of Egypt and caused a plague of boils to break out among both people and animals (Ex 9:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Ashes are frequently mentioned in the Bible in connection with the ancient custom of putting ashes on oneself as a symbol of extreme grief, penitence, humiliation, or sense of worthlessness. The Bible refers to ashes and dust almost interchangeably in this usage. Examples of such expressions of emotion include Tamar’s distress after being sexually assaulted by her half brother (2 Sm 13:19), Mordecai’s agony over the Persian king’s order of genocide for the Jews of his realm (Est 4:1-3), Daniel’s confession and pleading for his captive people (Dn 9:3), and the king of Nineveh’s repentance after hearing Jonah’s preaching (Jon 3:6; cf. Lk 10:13). Ashes were spoken of as symbols of humility (Gn 18:27), worthlessness or futility (Jb 13:12; 30:19; Is 44:20), and destruction (Ez 28:18; 2 Pt 2:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Mourning.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ASHES<\/h3>\n<p>Fine powder left after something has been thoroughly burned. The burning of sacrificial offerings on the tabernacle or temple altar produced ashes that were disposed of ceremonially (Lv 1:16; 4:12; 6:10-11; cf. Heb 9:13). The ashes on pagan altars figured in several OT accounts (1 Kgs 13:1-5; 2 Kgs 23:4). Ashes thrown into the air by Moses during the contest of God with the Egyptian pharaoh spread like fine dust over all the land of Egypt and caused a plague of boils to break out among both people and animals (Ex 9:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Ashes are frequently mentioned in the Bible in connection with the ancient custom of putting ashes on oneself as a symbol of extreme grief, penitence, humiliation, or sense of worthlessness. The Bible refers to ashes and dust almost interchangeably in this usage. Examples of such expressions of emotion include Tamar’s distress after being sexually assaulted by her half brother (2 Sm 13:19), Mordecai’s agony over the Persian king’s order of genocide for the Jews of his realm (Est 4:1-3), Daniel’s confession and pleading for his captive people (Dn 9:3), and the king of Nineveh’s repentance after hearing Jonah’s preaching (Jon 3:6; cf. Lk 10:13). Ashes were spoken of as symbols of humility (Gn 18:27), worthlessness or futility (Jb 13:12; 30:19; Is 44:20), and destruction (Ez 28:18; 2 Pt 2:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Mourning.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ASHES Fine powder left after something has been thoroughly burned. The burning of sacrificial offerings on the tabernacle or temple altar produced ashes that were disposed of ceremonially (Lv 1:16; 4:12; 6:10-11; cf. Heb 9:13). The ashes on pagan altars figured in several OT accounts (1 Kgs 13:1-5; 2 Kgs 23:4). Ashes thrown into the air by Moses during the contest of God with the Egyptian pharaoh spread like fine dust over all the land of Egypt and caused a plague of boils to break out among ...","summary_en":"ASHES Fine powder left after something has been thoroughly burned. The burning of sacrificial offerings on the tabernacle or temple altar produced ashes that were disposed of ceremonially (Lv 1:16; 4:12; 6:10-11; cf. Heb 9:13). The ashes on pagan altars figured in several OT accounts (1 Kgs 13:1-5; 2 Kgs 23:4). Ashes thrown into the air by Moses during the contest of God with the Egyptian pharaoh spread like fine dust over all the land of Egypt and caused a plague of boils to break out among ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30603,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Plants","title_en":"Plants","content_ro":"<h3>PLANTS<\/h3>\n<p>Identifying biblical plants has always been a difficult task, partly because people continue to identify the biblical elm, sycamore, lily, rose, and vine with modern plants, and also because they assume that all the plants now growing in the Holy Land were there in ancient biblical days, or that the plants referred to in the Bible are still to be found there today. Unfortunately, many plants now quite common in the Holy Land were not there in biblical days. Many plants that once grew in abundance in the Holy Land are now extinct. Some have been driven out by foreign invaders; others have been exterminated or nearly exterminated by overcultivation of the land, the destruction of forests, and the resulting changes in climatic and other environmental conditions. At one time the Holy Land was a land of palm trees, with the date palm as abundant and characteristic there as it was in Egypt, but today the date palm is much less common. Similarly, in antiquity, the towering cedars clothed the slopes of Lebanon and other mountain ranges. Now the few remaining specimens must be carefully fenced in to protect them against trampling and the ravages of goats.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Acacia<\/p>\n<p>• Acanthus<\/p>\n<p>• Algum<\/p>\n<p>• Almond<\/p>\n<p>• Almug<\/p>\n<p>• Aloe<\/p>\n<p>• Apple<\/p>\n<p>• Apricot<\/p>\n<p>• Ash<\/p>\n<p>• Aspen<\/p>\n<p>• Balm<\/p>\n<p>• Barley<\/p>\n<p>• Bdellium<\/p>\n<p>• Bean<\/p>\n<p>• Bitter Herbs<\/p>\n<p>• Boxthorn, European<\/p>\n<p>• Box Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Bramble<\/p>\n<p>• Broom<\/p>\n<p>• Buckthorn<\/p>\n<p>• Bush<\/p>\n<p>• Buttercup<\/p>\n<p>• Calamus<\/p>\n<p>• Cane<\/p>\n<p>• Caper Plant<\/p>\n<p>• Carob Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Cassia<\/p>\n<p>• Castor Oil Plant<\/p>\n<p>• Cedar<\/p>\n<p>• Chicory<\/p>\n<p>• Cinnamon<\/p>\n<p>• Citron Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Coriander<\/p>\n<p>• Cotton<\/p>\n<p>• Cucumber<\/p>\n<p>• Cummin<\/p>\n<p>• Cypress<\/p>\n<p>• Dandelion<\/p>\n<p>• Darnel Grass<\/p>\n<p>• Dill<\/p>\n<p>• Ebony<\/p>\n<p>• Endive<\/p>\n<p>• Fig, Fig Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Fir Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Flax<\/p>\n<p>• Frankincense<\/p>\n<p>• Galbanum<\/p>\n<p>• Garlic<\/p>\n<p>• Gourd, Wild<\/p>\n<p>• Hedge<\/p>\n<p>• Henna<\/p>\n<p>• Hyacinth<\/p>\n<p>• Hyssop<\/p>\n<p>• Juniper<\/p>\n<p>• Laurel or Sweet Bay<\/p>\n<p>• Leek<\/p>\n<p>• Lentil<\/p>\n<p>• Lettuce<\/p>\n<p>• Lily<\/p>\n<p>• Lotus Bush<\/p>\n<p>• Mallow<\/p>\n<p>• Mandrake<\/p>\n<p>• Melon<\/p>\n<p>• Millet<\/p>\n<p>• Mint<\/p>\n<p>• Mulberry<\/p>\n<p>• Mustard<\/p>\n<p>• Myrrh<\/p>\n<p>• Myrtle<\/p>\n<p>• Narcissus<\/p>\n<p>• Nard<\/p>\n<p>• Nettle<\/p>\n<p>• Nutmeg Flower<\/p>\n<p>• Oak<\/p>\n<p>• Oil Tree, Oleaster<\/p>\n<p>• Oleander<\/p>\n<p>• Olive, Olive Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Onion<\/p>\n<p>• Palm<\/p>\n<p>• Papyrus<\/p>\n<p>• Pine Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Pistachio<\/p>\n<p>• Plane Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Pomegranate<\/p>\n<p>• Poplar<\/p>\n<p>• Quince<\/p>\n<p>• Reed<\/p>\n<p>• Rue<\/p>\n<p>• Rush<\/p>\n<p>• Saffron<\/p>\n<p>• Sage<\/p>\n<p>• Spelt<\/p>\n<p>• Storax Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Sycamore<\/p>\n<p>• Tamarisk<\/p>\n<p>• Terebinth<\/p>\n<p>• Thistle, Thorn<\/p>\n<p>• Tulip<\/p>\n<p>• Tumbleweed<\/p>\n<p>• Vegetable<\/p>\n<p>• Vine<\/p>\n<p>• Walnut<\/p>\n<p>• Water Lily<\/p>\n<p>• Wheat<\/p>\n<p>• Wormwood<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Acacia\">Acacia <em>(Acacia tortilis<\/em> and <em>A. seyal)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any tree or shrub of the mimosa family of plants growing in warm regions. The plant referred to in the <span>kjv<\/span> as “shittah” (singular) or “shittim” (plural) is undoubtedly the acacia tree, the only timber tree of any considerable size in the Arabian desert. <em>Acacia tortilis<\/em> is by far the largest and most common tree in the desert in which the Israelites wandered for 40 years. It is especially conspicuous on Mt Sinai and was probably the species used for the tabernacle furnishings. <em>A. seyal<\/em> is less common, at least today. It can grow as high as 25 feet (7.6 meters), and bears yellow flowers on twisted branches. The wood is close grained, heavy and hard, orange-brown in color, and much valued in cabinetwork. The ancient Egyptians clamped shut mummy coffins with acacia wood.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Acanthus\">Acanthus <em>(Acanthus syriacus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The acanthus, perhaps referred to in Job 30:7 and Zephaniah 2:9, is a perennial thistlelike herb or small shrub about three feet (.9 meter) tall, and is a common weed in all Eastern countries. It has been used since time immemorial as a model for the leaf or scroll decorations in art.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Algum\">Algum <em>(Juniperus excelsa Bieb)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The timber from Lebanon referred to in 2 Chronicles 2:8 is probably the juniper. Some translators hold, however, that algum and almug are Hebrew variants for the same tree (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg, 2 Chr 2:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Almug (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Almond\">Almond <em>(Amygdalus communis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The almond is a peachlike tree with saw-toothed pointed leaves and gray bark. It grows to a height of from 10 to 25 feet (3 to 7.6 meters). It blooms very early in the year; its Hebrew name has its roots in “watch for.” To the Jews it was a welcome harbinger of spring (Jer 1:11).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Almug\">Almug <em>(Pterocarpus santalinus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The precious wood imported by King Solomon and used in making the pillars for the temple and for making harps and psalteries (1 Kgs 10:11-12). This timber was brought by sea from Ophir to Ezion-geber, near Elath. Modern authorities suggest that Ophir was either in Arabia, India, or East Africa near Mozambique. The reference to “algum“ in 2 Chronicles 2:8 is possibly to this tree. <em>See<\/em> Algum (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Aloe\">Aloe <em>(Aloe succotrina, Aquilaria agallocha)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Chiefly African, lilylike plant of the genus <em>Aloes,<\/em> certain species of which yield a drug and a fiber. Aloe is an aromatic substance mentioned in the Bible, together with myrrh, balm, and other fragrant plants (Ps 45:8; Prv 7:17; Sg 4:14; Jn 19:39). Most scholars think these passages refer to two different plants. The OT plant is likely to have been <em>Aquilaria agallocha,<\/em> the eaglewood, a large tree growing up to 120 feet (36.6 meters) tall with a trunk 12 feet (3.7 meters) in circumference. It is native to northern India, Malaya, and Indochina. The decaying wood is highly fragrant, and as such is highly valued as perfume and incense and for fumigation.<\/p>\n<p>The aloe of John 19:39 is thought to be the true aloe <em>(Aloe succotrina),<\/em> the juice of which was used by the Egyptians in embalming. Its smell, however, is not very agreeable, and it has a bitter taste. It is sometimes used by veterinarians as a horse medicine.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Apple\">Apple <em>(Malus sylvestris)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The identity of the fruit identified by the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tappuach<\/span> (Prv 25:11; Sg 2:3, 5; 7:8; 8:5) continues to be debated. In most English translations it has been rendered “apple” because of its close linguistic tie to the Arabic word <em>tuffah.<\/em> Many scholars identify this tree as the apricot, questioning whether apples fit the biblical description “apples of gold” and whether the apple tree was cultivated in ancient Palestine. Recent excavations at Kadesh-barnea, however, have uncovered carbonized apples, probably a crab apple <em>(Malus sylvestris),<\/em> dating to the ninth century <span>BC<\/span>. This would certainly allow for this ornamental apple’s cultivation in Solomon’s gardens.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apricot (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Apricot\">Apricot <em>(Prunus armeniaca)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The identification of the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tappuach<\/span> with the apricot continues to be debated. The apricot tree produces yellow-orange peachlike edible fruit and is native to western Asia and Africa. It is abundant in the Holy Land and probably has been so since early biblical times. The tree is a round-headed reddish-barked tree growing 30 feet (9.1 meters) tall. Most translations render this Hebrew word “apple,” though many scholars identify it with the apricot because of its descriptions in the biblical text (see Prv 25:11; Sg 2:3, 5; 7:8; 8:5; Jl 1:12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apple (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ash\">Ash <em>(Alhagi maurorum, Fraxinus ornus, Tamarix mannifera)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>There are several ash trees found in the Near East. One of these, the prickly alhagi <em>(Alhagi maurorum),<\/em> is a member of the pea family. It is a low, many-stemmed, much-branched shrub growing about three feet (.9 meter) tall with somewhat hairy twigs and pealike flowers. During the heat of the day, leaves exude a sweet, gummy substance that hardens in the air and is collected by shaking the bushes over a spread-out cloth.<\/p>\n<p>The manna tamarisk <em>(Tamarix mannifera)<\/em> is a multibranched shrub or a small tree 9 to 15 feet (2.7 to 4.6 meters) tall with rigid branches that have tiny pink flowers. It is found on deserts from the Holy Land to Arabia and the Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>The flowering or manna ash <em>(Fraxinus ornus)<\/em> is a tree that grows from 15 to 50 feet (4.6 to 15.2 meters) tall. The fruits are very similar to those produced by our species of ash. The ash of Isaiah 44:14 (<span>kjv<\/span>) is believed to be the Aleppo pine.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Aspen\">Aspen <em>(Populus euphratica<\/em> or <em>P. tremula)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several trees of the genus <em>Populus<\/em> with leaves attached by flattened leafstalks so that they tremble or “quake” in the wind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Balm\">Balm <em>(Balanites aegyptiaca, Pistacia lentiscus, Commiphora opobalsamum<\/em><em>)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>An oily aromatic resin exuded by chiefly tropical trees and shrubs and used medicinally; trees and shrubs producing this substance. References in Genesis 37:25, Jeremiah 8:22, 46:11, and 51:8 are thought to be either the Jericho balsam <em>(Balanites aegyptiaca)<\/em> or the lentisk or mastic tree <em>(Pistacia lentiscus).<\/em> The Jericho balsam is very common in Egypt, North Africa, the plains of Jericho, and the hot plains bordering on the Dead Sea. It is a small desert-loving plant, 9 to 15 feet (2.7 to 4.6 meters) tall, with slender, thorny branches and small clusters of green flowers.<\/p>\n<p>The lentisk or mastic tree is native to the Holy Land, and the reference in Genesis 43:11 is probably to this plant, since the implication is that this is a native product of the Holy Land unknown in Egypt at the time. This tree is a shrubby or bushy tree 3 to 10 feet (.9 to 3 meters) tall with evergreen leaves. The “balm” is a fragrant gummy exudation of the sap secured by making incisions in the stems and branches, usually in August. The best grades are in the form of yellow-white translucent tears or drops; they are employed in medicine as an astringent. The poorer grades are used extensively as a varnish. Children in the East use it as chewing gum.<\/p>\n<p>References to spices in 1 Kings 10:10, 2 Kings 20:13, Song of Songs 3:6, Isaiah 39:2, and Ezekiel 27:17 are thought to be the balm of Gilead <em>(Commiphora opobalsamum),<\/em> which in spite of its name is not a native of Gilead or even of the Holy Land but is indigenous to Arabia, especially the mountainous regions of Yemen. The trees were still in existence on the plain of Jericho at the time of the Roman conquest. The Roman conquerors carried branches to Rome as trophies of their victory over the Jews.<\/p>\n<p>This tree is a small, stiff-branched evergreen tree seldom more than 15 feet (4.6 meters) high with straggling branches. The “balm” is obtained by making incisions in the stem and branches of the tree. The sap soon hardens into small irregular nodules that are collected. Gum is also procured from green and ripe fruit.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Myrrh (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Barley\">Barley <em>(Hordeum distichon)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>A cereal grass bearing bearded flower spikes and edible seeds. The common barley <em>(Hordeum distichon),<\/em> the winter barley <em>(H. hex<\/em><em>astichon),<\/em> and the spring barley <em>(H. vulgare)<\/em> have been cultivated in temperate regions of the world since time immemorial and today still constitute one of the principal grain foods. Barley and wheat were the two staple cereal crops of Egypt and the Holy Land. Being less expensive, barley was mostly used for feeding cattle, although it was also used by itself or mixed with wheat and other seed as food for man (Ez 4:9-12). Barley is mentioned in the Bible over 30 times, either as a plant growing in the fields or in reference to products made from it, such as barley meal, barley bread, barley cakes, and barley loaves. As the common food of the poor, barley was also regarded as a symbol of poverty and cheapness or worthlessness (Hos 3:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bdellium\">Bdellium <em>(Commiphora africana)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Aromatic gum resin similar to myrrh, produced by various trees of the genus <em>Commiphora<\/em> of Africa and western Asia. The reference in Genesis 2:12 and Numbers 11:7 to bdellium is thought by most scholars today to refer to a gum resin, obtained from a shrub, <em>Commiphora africana<\/em>, that grows in south Arabia and northeastern Africa. The resin is yellowish, transparent, and fragrant, and looks like a pearl.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bean\">Bean <em>(Faba vulgaris)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The references in 2 Samuel 17:27-28 and Ezekiel 4:9 are generally regarded as referring to the broad bean. This species, an annual plant, is thought originally to have grown in northern Persia, but it was extensively cultivated in western Asia in very early times as a food plant. Beans have been found in the mummy coffins of Egyptian tombs, and they were also cultivated by the Greeks and Romans.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BitterHerbs\">Bitter Herbs <em>(Cichorium endivia, Taraxacum officinale, Lactuca sativa)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The “bitter herbs” of Exodus 12:8 and Numbers 9:11 seem to have been plants like endive <em>(Cichorium endivia),<\/em> the common chicory <em>(Cichorium intybus),<\/em> lettuce <em>(Lactuca sativa),<\/em> or the common dandelion <em>(Taraxacum officinale).<\/em> These are all weedy plants common in modern Egypt and western Asia and are still eaten by people living there. The leaves of the ordinary garden lettuce are intensely bitter when bleached. This is also true of the common dandelion. Others suggest that the bitter herbs were derived from thorns and thistles.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BoxthornEuropean\">Boxthorn, European <em>(Lycium europaeum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Various thorny shrubs, some species of which bear purplish flowers and brightly colored berries. The reference in Judges 9:14-15 is thought to be to the European boxthorn or desert-thorn. It is a thorny shrub 6 to 12 feet (1.8 to 3.7 meters) tall with clustered leaves and small violet flowers eventually producing small globular red berries. It is native to and common throughout the Holy Land, especially in the region from Lebanon to the Dead Sea.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BoxTree\">Box Tree <em>(Buxus longifolia)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The long-leaved box tree is a hardy evergreen tree found in the mountainous regions of the northern part of the Holy Land, the Galilean hills, and Lebanon. It grows to a height of about 20 feet (6.1 meters) with a slender trunk seldom more than six to eight inches (15.2 to 20.3 centimeters) in diameter. Its wood is very hard and takes a fine polish. It was cultivated by the Romans for its hard wood, which they inlaid with ivory for cabinets and jewel caskets. Scriptural references include Isaiah 41:19 and 60:13.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bramble\">Bramble <em>(Rubus sanctus, R. ulmifolius)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Palestinian bramble <em>(Rubus sanctus)<\/em> and the closely related elm-leaf bramble <em>(R. ulmifolius)<\/em> are prickly evergreen shrubs that spread by means of suckers. The stems and young shoots are covered with a characteristic bloom or whitish powder and short hairs. The prickles are strong, erect, and hairy. The flowers are white, pink, rose, or purple in color, and the fruit is round and black.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Thistle, Thorn (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Broom\">Broom <em>(Retama raetam)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>A shrub native to Eurasia. The word translated “juniper” in the <span>kjv<\/span> has nothing to do with the true junipers but refers rather to a species of broom, known as the white broom <em>(Retama raetam).<\/em> Its branches are longer and flexible, forming an erect, dense bush 3 to 12 feet (.9 to 3.7 meters) tall. The leaves are small and sparse, yet it forms an agreeable shade in a desert region. The white pealike flowers are sweet and very fragrant and are borne in clusters along the twigs. It is a beautiful shrub that grows in the desert regions of Palestine, Syria, and Persia. In many desert areas it is the only bush that affords any shade (1 Kgs 19:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>The “juniper roots” of Job 30:4 are not the roots of either the juniper or white broom. The roots of the latter are very nauseating and could not be eaten in the manner described by Job. Job’s “juniper roots” were probably an edible parasitic plant <em>(Cynomorium coccineum).<\/em> This plant grows in salt marshes and maritime sands. It is frequently eaten in times of food scarcity and at one time was highly prized for its supposed medicinal value in the treatment of dysentery.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Buckthorn\">Buckthorn <em>(Rhamnus palaestina)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Palestinian buckthorn is a shrub or small tree attaining a height of three to six feet (.9 to 1.8 meters) with velvety, thorny branches, evergreen leaves, and clusters of small flowers blooming in March or April. It grows in thickets and on hillsides from Syria and Lebanon through the Holy Land to Arabia and the Sinai.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bush\">Bush <em>(Acacia nilotica, Loranthus acaciae)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Low, branching, woody plant, usually smaller than a tree. There are differences of opinion in regard to the bush out of which the Lord appeared to Moses (Ex 3:2-4). From the biblical account, it seems most likely that the event was a miraculous one. However, some seek a natural explanation and believe that the burning bush may have been the crimson-flowered mistletoe or acacia strap flower <em>(Loranthus acaciae),<\/em> which grows in great profusion as a partial parasite on the various acacia shrubs, such as the thorny acacia <em>(Acacia nilotica),<\/em> in the Holy Land and Sinai. When in full bloom, the mistletoe imparts to the shrub or tree the appearance of being on fire because its brilliant flame-colored blossoms stand out against the green foliage and yellow flowers of the host plants.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Buttercup\">Buttercup <em>(Ranunculus asiaticus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Persian buttercup is one of the flowers or grasses of the field (Mt 6:28-30). It is a showy plant blooming in all brilliant colors except blue, with double flowers sometimes measuring two inches (5.1 centimeters) across.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Calamus\">Calamus <em>(Acorus calamus, Andropogon aroma<\/em><em>ticus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>A plant, or its aromatic root; any of a variety of tropical Asiatic palms. One of the plants that grew in Solomon’s garden (Sg 4:14). The sweet flag <em>(Acorus<\/em> <em>calamus)<\/em> and the beardgrass <em>(Andropogon aromaticus)<\/em> have been suggested as the plants from which calamus came. The sweet flag is highly aromatic and grows in Europe and Asia, but it is not known in the Holy Land. Indigenous to India, beardgrass is highly odoriferous when bruised and is thought to have furnished the calamus of the Bible. It yields an oil known as ginger-grass oil.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cane\">Cane <em>(Saccharum officinarum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>It is thought that there were two species of sugarcane indigenous to and growing wild in the Holy Land. One of these, <em>Saccharum sara,<\/em> is known to be only from Lebanon. The other native species is <em>S. biflorum,<\/em> which grows on the banks of ditches and streams from Syria and Lebanon through the Holy Land south to Stony Arabia and the Sinai. This may be the wild cane familiar to the Jews. Most authorities, however, think that the “sweet cane” of Isaiah 43:24 was the true sugarcane <em>(S. officinarum).<\/em> This plant is thought to have originated in the tropics of the eastern hemisphere. It has been cultivated by people since time immemorial and is not now known in the wild state anywhere. It is a tall, stout perennial grass, maizelike in aspect with many jointed stems and a large plumelike terminal cluster of flowers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CaperPlant\">Caper Plant <em>(Capparis sincula)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Spiny, trailing shrub of Mediterranean region; the flower bud of this shrub. The word “desire” in Ecclesiastes 12:5 may actually refer to the caper berry. The common caper or caper berry grows profusely in Syria, Lebanon, the Holy Land, and in the mountain valleys of Sinai. The plant may sometimes grow upright but more generally spreads itself weakly over the ground like a vine, covering rocks, ruins, and old walls like ivy. The young flower buds, pickled in vinegar, were used by the ancients as a condiment for meat. The berries were also used in cooking.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CarobTree\">Carob Tree <em>(Ceratonia siliqua)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Evergreen of the Mediterranean region having edible pods. Scholars generally agree that the pods of the carob or locust tree were the “husks” of Jesus’ parable of the prodigal son (Lk 15:16). The carob is an attractive evergreen leguminous tree that is very common throughout the Holy Land, Syria, and Egypt. The pods are most abundant in April and May and contain numerous pealike seeds embedded in an agreeably flavored mucilaginous sweetish pulp. The pods are also used abundantly now as they were in antiquity for feeding cattle, horses, and pigs. In time of scarcity, they are used as human food and perhaps even regularly by the very poor. The carob is frequently mentioned in the Talmud as a source of good food for domestic animals. The seeds of the carob were formerly employed as a standard of weight and are the source of the term “carat.” Some commentators suggest that the “locusts” eaten by John the Baptist (Mt 3:4) were not insects but the fruit of the carob tree.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cassia\">Cassia <em>(Cinnamomum cassia, Saussurea lappa)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Tree of tropical Asia with bark similar but inferior to cinnamon. The “cassia” of Exodus 30:24 and Ezekiel 27:19 is the cassia bark tree, <em>Cinnamomum cassia.<\/em> In Psalm 45:8 the reference seems to be to the Indian orris, <em>Saussurea lappa.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CastorOilPlant\">Castor Oil Plant <em>(Ricinus communis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Large plant, native to tropical Africa and Asia, cultivated for ornamental reasons and for extraction of oil from its seeds. The gourd of Jonah 4:6-7 was probably the ordinary castor bean. The castor bean is a tender shrub, growing 3 to 12 or more feet (.9 to 3.7 meters) tall with huge leaves that resemble the outstretched human hand. The castor bean plant is found in waste places, especially near water, in both Lebanon and the Holy Land and often is cultivated. In hot climates it becomes treelike and affords a dense shade by the abundance of its huge, umbrella-like leaves. It is known in the Orient for the rapidity of its growth. The oil extracted from the seeds of the castor bean was used by the Jews in ceremonial rites and is mentioned among the five kinds of oil that rabbinical tradition sanctioned for such use. The seeds themselves are poisonous when eaten.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cedar\">Cedar <em>(Cedrus libani)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several coniferous evergreen trees of the genus native to the Old World. With few exceptions, the references to “cedar” are to the well-known cedar of Lebanon. This is a noble tree, the tallest and most massive with which the Israelites were acquainted. It grows quite rapidly, attaining a height of up to 120 feet (36.6 meters) with a trunk diameter of as much as 8 feet (2.4 meters). In Solomon’s day these trees were obviously abundant on the mountains of Lebanon, but now, because of excessive lumbering, they are very rare. The cedar of Lebanon was held in high esteem not only for its vigor, beauty, and age but also for the fragrance and remarkable lasting qualities of the wood. It symbolizes grandeur, might, majesty, dignity, lofty stature, and wide expansion. References in Ezekiel 17:3, 22-24, and 31:3-18 beautifully illustrate how these lofty kings of the forest symbolize and typify worldly strength, power, and glory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Chicory\">Chicory <em>(Cichorium intybus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Bitter Herbs (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cinnamon\">Cinnamon <em>(Cinnamomum zeylanicum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of trees of this genus, native to tropical Asia, with aromatic bark that, when ground, is used as a spice. The cinnamon of Exodus 30:23, Proverbs 7:17, Song of Songs 4:14, and Revelation 18:13 is undoubtedly <em>Cinnamomum zeylanicum.<\/em> The tree is a rather low-growing one, never getting more than 30 feet (9.1 meters) high, with a smooth, ash-colored bark and widespread branches and white flowers. Its shiny, beautifully veined evergreen leaves grow about nine inches (22.9 centimeters) long and two inches (5.1 centimeters) wide.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews always regarded cinnamon as a deliciously fragrant substance and valued it highly as a spice and a perfume. It was one of the principal ingredients used in the manufacture of the precious ointments, or “holy oil,” that Moses was commanded to use in the tabernacle for anointing the sacred vessels and officiating priests. It was undoubtedly very costly and precious.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CitronTree\">Citron Tree <em>(Tetraclinis articulata)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Tree native to Asia bearing lemonlike fruit with a thick, fragrant rind. It seldom exceeds a height of 30 feet (9.1 meters) and has hard, dark-colored, durable, fragrant wood that takes a fine polish. The wood was one of the most highly prized woods of the ancients, who employed it extensively for cabinetwork. It was commonly referred to as being worth its weight in gold. The wood, owing to its resinous properties, is slow to decay and remains practically uninjured by insects.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Coriander\">Coriander <em>(Coriandrum sativum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The references in Exodus 16:31 and Numbers 11:7 are clearly to the common coriander plant. The coriander was found quite commonly growing along with grain in cultivated fields throughout the Holy Land. It grows wild in Egypt and was used by the ancients both as condiment and as a medicine. The leaves are quite aromatic and are used in soups and for flavoring puddings, curries, and wines. The coriander is still used today as a spice by the Arabs. In Scripture it is mentioned only in connection with manna, which was said to resemble coriander seeds in size, shape, and color.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cotton\">Cotton <em>(Gossypium herbaceum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of various plants or shrubs of this genus grown in warm climates for the soft white fiber attached to their seeds and the oil from these seeds. The “green” of the <span>kjv<\/span> in Esther 1:6 is undoubtedly a reference to the Levant cotton <em>(Gossypium herbaceum)<\/em> that was cultivated since time immemorial in the Far East. Alexander the Great brought it back from India. It is probable that the Jews became acquainted with cotton during the period of their Persian captivity under King Ahasuerus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cucumber\">Cucumber <em>(Cucumis chate, C. sativus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The cucumber is an annual climbing or trailing vine, the origin of which is unknown. It has been cultivated in all the warm countries of the Old World since prehistoric times. Cucumbers are usually eaten raw; a cucumber and a barley cake or some other kind of bread often constitute a meal. The reference to “a lodge in a garden of cucumbers” (Is 1:8) refers to the crudely built small house or lodge often set up in Palestinian cucumber fields and vineyards.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cummin\">Cummin <em>(Cuminum cyminum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The references in Isaiah 28:25-27 and Matthew 23:23 are clearly to the cummin—a common, annual plant of the carrot family said to be native to Egypt and the region of the eastern Mediterranean. It has long been cultivated for its powerfully aromatic and pungent seeds, which are similar to caraway seeds but larger. They do not have as agreeable a taste as caraway seeds but nevertheless were used extensively as a flavor or spice and sometimes were even mixed with flour in making bread. Cummin was also used medicinally and as a condiment with fish and meats.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cypress\">Cypress <em>(Cupressus sempervirens horizontalis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The cypress is a massive, tall-growing evergreen with scalelike leaves and is widely distributed in the mountainous regions of the Holy Land. On Mt Lebanon and Mt Hermon it grows together with the cedar and oak. Its usual height is 50 to 60 feet (15.2 to 18.3 meters), but it may grow as tall as 80 feet (24.2 meters). It is said to have been used extensively in shipbuilding by the Phoenicians, Cretans, and Greeks. There is general agreement that the “gopher wood” of Genesis 6:14 is cypress because the wood is very durable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dandelion\">Dandelion <em>(Taraxacum officinale)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Bitter Herbs (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DarnelGrass\">Darnel Grass <em>(Lolium temulentum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>It is generally agreed that the “tares” of the <span>kjv<\/span> (Mt 13:24-30) are the annual or bearded darnel grass. It is a strong grass closely resembling wheat or rye in appearance. The seeds are much smaller than those of wheat or rye, but it is extremely difficult to distinguish it from wheat or rye in its early stages. If it is not eradicated early but is left until the time of harvest, it is cut down with the wheat and the two are subsequently very difficult to separate. The seeds are poisonous, either due to some chemicals naturally present or because of a fungus that grows within the seeds.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dill\">Dill <em>(Anethum graveolens)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Dill is a weedy annual plant resembling parsley and fennel, 12 to 20 inches (30.5 to 50.8 centimeters) tall with yellow flowers. The reference in Matthew 23:23 (<span>kjv<\/span>) to anise is probably a reference to dill. This plant is widely cultivated for seeds that are aromatic and carminative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ebony\">Ebony <em>(Diospyros ebenaster, D. ebenum, D. mela<\/em><em>noxylon)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Chiefly tropical tree of southern Asia with hard, dark-colored heartwood. Ebony comes from the date plum or date tree <em>(Diospyros ebenaster<\/em> and <em>D. melanoxylon)<\/em> of India and is quite different from the date palm. It was sent by Phoenician ships across the Arabian Sea and up the Red Sea to the market in Tyre, from which it was carried overland by camel caravans. The outer wood of these trees is white and soft, but when old, the interior wood becomes hard, black, heavy, and durable and still constitutes most of the costly ebony of commerce. Ebony takes on a fine polish and is highly valued for cabinetwork, for turnery, for the manufacture of fancy ornamental articles and instruments, and as a veneer for other woods.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel mentions ivory and ebony together (Ez 27:15). Ebony was and still is frequently inlaid with ivory, with which it contrasts so strikingly in color.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Endive\">Endive <em>(Cichorium endivia)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Bitter Herbs (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FigFigTree\">Fig, Fig Tree <em>(Ficus carica)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several trees or shrubs of this genus, native to the Mediterranean region; its edible fruit. The common fig, mentioned some 60 times in the Bible, is one of the most important Bible plants. Its leaves are spoken of first in Genesis 3:7. The fig is generally regarded as native to southwestern Asia and Syria, but already in early times it was also cultivated extensively in Egypt and the Holy Land, where it was one of the principal foods. First Samuel 25:18 states that a part of the gift sent by Abigail to David consisted of 200 cakes of figs.<\/p>\n<p>The fig tree has a very peculiar type of fruit called a syconium, which is actually a very much enlarged and fleshy receptacle. It is pollinated by a wasp, without which it cannot get its fruit; this was discovered when it was first transplanted to California.<\/p>\n<p>The fig puts out its earliest fruit buds before its leaves, the former in February and the latter in April or May. When the leaves are out, the fruit ought to be ripe (Mt 21:19).<\/p>\n<p>Whenever the prophets of old berated the people for their wickedness, they often threatened that the vine and the fig crops would be destroyed. And when they held out the promise of great rewards, they said that the vine and fig crop would be restored (Jer 8:13; Hos 2:12; Jl 1:7, 12; Mi 4:4; Zec 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FirTree\">Fir Tree <em>(Abies cilicica)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>This a generic term for various evergreen trees having flat needles and erect cones. In all probability, most of the references in Scripture to the fir are references to the pine, cypress, or juniper. The only true fir in the Holy Land grows in the higher parts of Lebanon and the mountains northward. It attains a height of 30 to 75 feet (9.1 to 22.9 meters) and is widely cultivated.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Flax\">Flax <em>(Linum usitatissimum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several plants of this genus, one particularly being widely cultivated for the linseed oil from its seeds and the fine textile fibers from its stems. Flax is the oldest known of the textile fibers. Cotton is identified only once in the Bible (Est 1:6). There is no mention of any other fiber plant being cultivated in Egypt or the Holy Land in biblical days, and for that reason it is thought that linen was the material out of which clothes other than woolen ones were made. Linen was also used for domestic purposes such as towels (Jn 13:4-5), napkins (11:44), girdles and undergarments (Is 3:23; Mk 14:51), nets (Is 19:8-9), and measuring lines (Ez 40:3). The priests serving in the temple were to wear nothing but linen clothes; a mixed cloth of wool and flax together was strictly forbidden to the Jews (Lv 19:19; Dt 22:11).<\/p>\n<p>At least three kinds of linen were used in biblical times, and apparently there were particular uses for each kind. Ordinary linen of coarsest texture is mentioned in Leviticus 6:10, Ezekiel 9:2, Daniel 10:5, and Revelation 15:6. The second type of linen of superior quality is mentioned in Exodus 26:1 and 39:27. A third type of linen of finest texture and high cost is mentioned in 1 Chronicles 15:27, Esther 8:15, and Revelation 19:8.<\/p>\n<p>The common flax plant grows from one to four feet (.3 to 1.2 meters) tall with a simple, slender, wirelike stem and numerous small, pale, lancelike green leaves. The failure of the flax crop is listed as one of God’s punishments (Hos 2:9). The manufacture of linen from flax fibers was a domestic industry of Jewish women (Prv 31:13, 19), ranging from ordinary clothing to the robes and aprons worn by the priest and temple attendants. Linen was also used for wicks in lamps (Is 42:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Frankincense\">Frankincense <em>(Boswellia)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Aromatic genus resin used chiefly as incense. Frankincense is obtained from three species of a single genus of plants that grow in southern Arabia, Ethiopia, Somaliland, India, and the East Indies. The trees are large in size, related to the turpentine or terebinth tree and to those that produce balsam and myrrh. The gum has a bitter taste and gives off a strong odor in the form of a volatile oil when warmed or burned. It is obtained by successive incisions in the bark of the trunk and in the branches of living trees. It is thought that the Hebrews imported all their frankincense from Arabia, especially from the region about Sheba.<\/p>\n<p>Frankincense is mentioned 21 times in the Bible (e.g., Ex 30:34; 1 Chr 9:29; Neh 13:9; Sg 3:6; 4:6, 14; Mt 2:11; Rv 18:13) and was probably employed almost exclusively in the sacrificial services of the tabernacle and temple until the time of Solomon. It has always been the most important incense resin in the world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galbanum\">Galbanum <em>(Ferula galbaniflua)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Galbanum is a malodorous yellowish or brownish gum resin containing the chemical substance umbelliferone, obtained from several species of plants related to the fennel, native to Syria and Persia. The gum is a natural exudation of the stem or is obtained by making a transverse incision in the young stem a few inches above the ground. The milky juice soon hardens and forms one of the kinds of commercial galbanum. Its odor is strongly balsamic, pungent, and disagreeable when burned. Galbanum was one of the ingredients used to form the “holy incense” (Ex 30:34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Garlic\">Garlic <em>(Allium sativum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Onion (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GourdWild\">Gourd, Wild <em>(Citrullus colocynthis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>There has been considerable difference of opinion regarding the meaning of the words translated “wild gourds” (2 Kgs 4:39) or “gall” (Dt 29:18; 32:32; Ps 69:21; Jer 8:14; 9:15; 23:15; Lam 3:5, 19; Am 6:12; Mt 27:34; Acts 8:23). Most scholars today believe the plant referred to was the colocynth, a cucumber-like vine that trails on the ground or climbs over shrubs and fences. The fruit contains a soft spongy pulp, which is intensely bitter, strongly cathartic, and sometimes poisonous.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hedge\">Hedge <em>(Rhamnus palaestina, Balanites aegyptiaca, Lycium europaeum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Row of closely planted shrubs or low-growing trees forming a fence or boundary. A number of plants were used to provide hedges in Bible times. One of these was the Palestine buckthorn, <em>Rhamnus palaestina.<\/em> This plant is a shrub or a small tree growing from three to six feet (.9 to 1.8 meters) tall with velvety, thorny branches, evergreen leaves, and clusters of small flowers blooming in March and April. It grows in thickets and on hillsides from Syria through the Holy Land to Arabia and the Sinai. The Jericho balsam <em>(Balanites aegyptiaca)<\/em> and the European boxthorn <em>(Lycium europaeum)<\/em> are also prickly shrubs widely used as hedges in the Holy Land and may be the plants referred to in Proverbs 15:19 and Hosea 2:6.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Henna\">Henna <em>(Lawsonia inermis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Tree or shrub of Asia and northern Africa with fragrant reddish or white flowers and leaves from which a reddish dye is made. The plant referred to in Song of Songs 1:14 and 4:13 and translated as “camphire” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is thought by scholars today to refer to the henna plant. It is a native of northern India and grows wild in the Sudan, Egypt, Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, and the Holy Land. It grows from 4 to 12 feet (1.2 to 3.7 meters) tall, and its scent is similar to that of roses.<\/p>\n<p>Henna leaves are dried, crushed into a powder, mixed with water, and made into a paste that has been used since time immemorial as a cosmetic. A number of mummies have been found decorated with henna. Henna was used to provide a bright yellow, orange, or red color to the fingernails, toenails, the tips of the fingers, the palms of the hand, and the soles of the feet of young girls. Men also used it for coloring their beards and the manes and tails of horses. The dye had to be renewed once every two or three weeks. This use of henna as a cosmetic was common in Egypt at the time the children of Israel were there as slaves; they were undoubtedly familiar with it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hyacinth\">Hyacinth <em>(Hyacinthus orientalis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The lily referred to in Song of Songs 2:1-2, 16; 4:5; and 6:2-4 may well be the garden hyacinth. It is native to, and very common in, the fields and rocky places in the Holy Land, Lebanon, and northward. Its flowers in the wild form are always deep blue and very fragrant.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lily (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hyssop\">Hyssop <em>(Origanum maru)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Woody plant native to Asia with spikes of small blue flowers and aromatic leaves used as a condiment and in perfumery. There is little agreement among botanists as to the exact identity of the biblical “hyssop.” Some have suggested <em>Hyssopus offici<\/em><em>nalis,<\/em> the well-known garden herb now called hyssop. However, this plant is not native either to the Holy Land or Egypt, being found only in southern Europe. Moreover, it does not fit the requirements of the biblical plant.<\/p>\n<p>The “hyssop” of the OT is likely the Syrian or Egyptian marjoram <em>(Origanum maru).<\/em> It is referred to in Exodus 12:22; Leviticus 14:4-6, 52; Numbers 19:6, 18; 1 Kings 4:33; Psalm 51:7; and Hebrews 9:19. The marjorams are mints growing (under favorable conditions) about two or three feet (.6 to .9 meter) tall, but more often are dwarfed when growing in rock crevices and walls (cf. 1 Kgs 4:33). An aromatic substance is obtained from the crushed and dried leaves. If gathered together in a bunch with leaves and flowers, the hairy stems of the marjoram would hold liquid very well and would make an excellent sprinkler.<\/p>\n\n<p>The hyssop of the crucifixion passage in the NT (Jn 19:29) is probably the sorghum, a tall cereal plant grown primarily for food but also used for brushes and mops.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Juniper\">Juniper <em>(Juniperus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Variety of evergreen tree or shrub. The plant referred to in Jeremiah 17:6 and 48:6 and translated in the <span>kjv<\/span> “heath” is probably the savin or Phoenician juniper. The Phoenician juniper, <em>Juniperus phoenicia,<\/em> is found in the hills and rocky places of Arabia. The savin juniper, <em>J. sabina,<\/em> is common throughout the deserts, plains, and rocky places of Syria and Palestine. These references are to the brown-berried cedar, or sharp cedar.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LaurelorSweetBay\">Laurel or Sweet Bay <em>(Laurus nobilis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Shrub or tree native to the Mediterranean region. While the reference in Psalm 37:35 may be to the cedar of Lebanon, most scholars refer the “green bay tree” (<span>kjv<\/span>) of the psalmist to the sweet bay, a native of the Holy Land, inhabiting thickets and woods from the coast to the middle montane zone. It is an evergreen tree attaining a height from 40 to 60 feet (12.2 to 18.3 meters).<\/p>\n<p>Even though the tree is abundant on Mt Carmel and around Hebron, it is generally not common in the Holy Land. Its leaves are still used as a condiment, and its fruit, leaves, and bark have long been used in medicine.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leek\">Leek <em>(Allium porrum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Onion (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lentil\">Lentil <em>(Lens esculenta)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The lentil plant to which Genesis 25:29-34, 2 Samuel 17:27-29, 23:11, and Ezekiel 4:9 refer is a small, erect, annual, vetchlike plant with slender stems and tendril-bearing leaves. It produces small, white, violet-striped flowers with flat, pealike pods in which the lentils are borne.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lettuce\">Lettuce <em>(Lactuca sativa)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Bitter Herbs (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lily\">Lily <em>(Lilium)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of various plants of the genus <em>Lilium<\/em> having large, variously colored, trumpet-shaped flowers; and related plants. The lily is one of the most famous of all the plants in the Bible, but it is also one about which there has been considerable difference of opinion. It seems probable that several kinds of plants, perhaps five or six, are called lilies in the <span>kjv<\/span>. Most authorities regard the Palestine anemone or wind flower, <em>Anemone coronaria,<\/em> as the “lily of the field” (Mt 6:28, <span>kjv<\/span>) that surpassed Solomon in all his glory. These flowers are found in every part of the Holy Land in profusion; the most common forms are scarlet or yellow, but the Palestine anemone may also be blue, purple, rose, or white in color. The flower attains a diameter of two and three-quarter inches (7 centimeters).<\/p>\n<p>An alternative suggestion is the Palestinian chamomile, <em>Anthemis palaestina,<\/em> a common, white, daisylike plant. The chamomile is gathered like dry grass and thrown into the furnace when it dries up.<\/p>\n<p>Another proposed plant is <em>Lilium chalcedonicum,<\/em> the scarlet or Martagon lily. The statement in Song of Songs 5:13—“his lips like lilies”—would better fit this plant than the Palestine anemone. The reference is apparently to a rare plant of exceptional beauty. The scarlet lily is rare in the Holy Land; indeed, some botanists doubt that it lives there.<\/p>\n<p>The references in 1 Kings 7:19, 22, 26 and 2 Chronicles 4:5 are probably to the water lily, <em>Nymphaea alba,<\/em> which served as the pattern. The water lily is quite common in Europe and also in the Holy Land and northern Africa.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LotusBush\">Lotus Bush <em>(Zizyphus lotus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The “shady trees” of Job 40:21-22 (<span>kjv<\/span>; cf. <span>nlt<\/span> “lotus plants”) may refer to the lotus bush of the Middle East, <em>Zizyphus lotus,<\/em> a shrub or low tree that grows to a height of about five feet (1.5 meters) with smooth, zigzag, whitish branches.<\/p>\n<p>Other commentators believe that the shady trees of Job are large-leafed trees such as the plane tree, <em>Platanus orientalis,<\/em> or the oleander, <em>Nerium oleander.<\/em> This suggestion is based on the assumption that the animal described in Job 40 is the hippopotamus, and it seems unlikely that the hippopotamus would live under a lotus bush or even be found in places where this shrub grows. These individuals regard the plane tree or the oleander as more likely.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mallow\">Mallow <em>(Atriplex)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word used in Job 30:4 implies saltiness, and for this reason botanists believe that it refers to one of the species of the saltwort or orach. Twenty-one species of saltwort occur in the Holy Land, almost all of which are common and could well meet the requirements of the text. <em>Atriplex halimus<\/em> is the species usually suggested, a strong-growing bushy shrub related to the spinach.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mandrake\">Mandrake <em>(Mandragora officinarum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The mandrake or love apple is a stemless herbaceous perennial related to the nightshade, potato, and tomato. It has a large, beetlike, often forked taproot from the top of which arise many dark leaves about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long and four inches (10.2 centimeters) wide. The plant is slightly poisonous, and the thick taproots have some resemblance in shape to the lower parts of the human body. For this reason certain aphrodisiac properties were ascribed to it (cf. Gn 30:14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The love apple was a common plant in deserted fields throughout the Holy Land. It is native to the entire Mediterranean region, southern Europe, and Asia Minor. The mandrake is mentioned in Song of Songs 7:13, though some scholars believe the writer may actually have been referring to the citron or to the common edible field mushroom, <em>Agaricus campestris.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Melon\">Melon <em>(Cucumis melo, Citrullus vulgaris)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several varieties of these two related vines having a hard rind and juicy flesh. The melons of Numbers 11:5 may be either the muskmelon <em>(Cucumis melo)<\/em> or the watermelon <em>(Citrullus vulgaris).<\/em> It may be that both fruits are referred to.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Millet\">Millet <em>(Panicum miliaceum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>A grass grown in Eurasia for its edible seed. Millet seeds are the smallest of all the grass seeds cultivated as food but are produced profusely. Millet is an annual grass seldom more that two feet (.6 meter) tall. The small seeds of the millet are used on cakes and eaten uncooked by the poor of the land.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mint\">Mint <em>(Mentha)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of various plants of this family with aromatic foliage that is processed for flavoring. Quite a few mints are common in the Holy Land, but the horse mint <em>(Mentha longifolia)<\/em> is probably the one referred to in Matthew 23:23 and Luke 11:42. Mints were employed by the ancient Hebrews, Greeks, and Romans for flavoring, as a carminative in medicine, and as a condiment in cooking.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mulberry\">Mulberry <em>(Morus nigra)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any tree of this family, some bearing dark-purple fruit and one bearing white fruit, having leaves used as food for silkworms. The sycamine tree of Luke 17:6 (<span>kjv<\/span>) is evidently the black mulberry, <em>Morus nigra.<\/em> It is a low-growing, thick-crowned, stiff-branched tree standing from 24 to 35 feet (7.3 to 10.7 meters) tall, though rarely more than 30 feet (9.1 meters) tall. Originally native to northern Persia, it is now cultivated throughout the Middle East for its fruit. The Chinese or Indian species, <em>M. alba,<\/em> was until recently widely cultivated in Syria and the Holy Land but is not indigenous.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mustard\">Mustard <em>(Brassica nigra, B. arvensis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Various plants of this genus are native to Eurasia, some of which are cultivated for their edible seeds. While there is disagreement about the identity of the “mustard” of Matthew 13:31-32, 17:20, Mark 4:31, Luke 13:19, and 17:6, it is generally thought to be the ordinary black mustard, <em>Brassica nigra.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The mustard Jesus referred to may be the charlock or wild mustard, <em>B. arvensis,<\/em> which normally grows from one to three feet (.3 to .9 meter) tall. Some have suggested that it was actually <em>Salvadora persica,<\/em> found in thickets around the Dead Sea. The plant has a pleasant aromatic taste resembling that of mustard, and if taken in considerable quantity, it will produce an irritation of the nose and eyes similar to that of mustard. However, this plant does not grow as far north as Galilee, and the fruits are rather large and stony, thus hardly fitting the description of the parable.<\/p>\n<p>While the seeds of the mustard are not the smallest known, they were probably the smallest familiar to the common people who comprised Jesus’ audience in Galilee.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Myrrh\">Myrrh <em>(Commiphora myrrha, C. kataf)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Shrub or tree exuding an aromatic gum resin used in perfume and incense. Most of the references in Scripture to myrrh are to <em>Commiphora myrrha,<\/em> although <em>C. kataf<\/em> may also be involved since it grows in the same region and is similar. The two trees are native to Arabia, Ethiopia, and the Somali coast of east Africa. They yield a gummy exudation that constitutes most of the myrrh of commerce. Both species are low, scrubby, thick- and stiff-branched thorny shrubs or small trees that grow in rocky places, especially on limestone hills. In the East it is highly regarded as an aromatic substance, perfume, and medicine. The ancient Egyptians burned it in their temples and embalmed their dead with it; the Jews also used it for embalming (Jn 19:39). The Hebrews held it in high regard as a perfume (Ps 45:8).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Myrtle\">Myrtle <em>(Myrtus communis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The myrtle tree is common in the Holy Land, especially around Bethlehem, Lebanon, Hebron, and the slopes of Mt Carmel and Mt Tabor. It is native to western Asia and in good environments grows into a small evergreen tree 20 to 30 feet (6.2 to 9.1 meters) tall. More often, however, it is a straggling bush 1½ to 4 feet (.5 to 1.2 meters) tall.<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, myrtle is referred to chiefly as a symbol of God’s generosity. Branches of myrtle trees were included among those that Nehemiah ordered to be gathered for the Feast of Tabernacles (Neh 8:15). The myrtle was symbolic not only of peace but also of justice.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Narcissus\">Narcissus <em>(Narcissus tazetta)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Widely cultivated plant of this family with narrow leaves and usually white or yellow flowers with a cup-crown or trumpet-shaped crown. The polyanthus narcissus <em>(Narcissus tazetta)<\/em> appears to be the plant referred to in Isaiah 35:1. This narcissus grows abundantly on the plains of Sharon and elsewhere in Palestine. Being sweet-smelling, it is a great favorite.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Nard\">Nard <em>(Nardostachys jatamansi)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The nard is a perennial herb with strong, pleasantly scented roots. It is native to high altitudes in the Himalayas, and its range extends from there into western Asia. The roots and spikelike wooly young stems are dried before the leaves unfold and are used for making perfume. It is still used in India as a perfume for the hair, and there is every reason to believe that the spikenard of Scripture (Sg 1:12; 4:13-14; Mk 14:3; Jn 12:3) came originally from India.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Nettle\">Nettle <em>(Urtica)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Plant of this genus having toothed leaves covered with hairs that exude a stinging flush. Four species of nettle are found in the Holy Land: the common or great nettle, <em>Urtica dioica;<\/em> the Roman nettle, <em>U. pilulifera;<\/em> the small nettle, <em>U. urens;<\/em> and <em>U. caudata,<\/em> which is similar to the small nettle. Some nettles attain a height of five to six feet (1.5 to 1.8 meters). They are common pests of waste places and fields. They are often seen occupying ground that was once cultivated but has since been neglected (Is 34:13; Hos 9:6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NutmegFlower\">Nutmeg Flower <em>(Nigella sativa)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The “fitches” of Isaiah 28:25-27 (<span>kjv<\/span>) are probably the nutmeg flower, an annual plant of the buttercup family. The plant grows wild in southern Europe, Syria, Egypt, north Africa, and other Mediterranean lands, where it is extensively cultivated for its strongly pungent, pepperlike aromatic seeds. These are sprinkled over some kinds of bread and cakes in the East and are used for flavoring curries and other dishes in the Holy Land and Egypt. Cummin and nutmeg flowers are still gathered in the Holy Land in the same way described by Isaiah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Oak\">Oak <em>(Quercus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>At least five species of oaks are found in Palestine. One of these is the kermes oak <em>(Quercus coccifera),<\/em> the host of the insect <em>Coccus ilicis,<\/em> which produces the scarlet dye used in coloring linen and wool (Gn 38:28-30; Ex 25:4; 26:1; 28:33; 35:23; 39:24; Lv 14:4-6, 51-52; Nm 19:6; 2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14; Is 1:18; Heb 9:19; Rv 18:12). The kermes oak grows from 6 to 35 feet (1.8 to 10.7 meters) tall and is found in the mountainous regions of Syria, Lebanon, and the Holy Land. When it grows alone, the kermes oak often becomes a large tree. It was regularly planted by tombs in the East. The oak was always respected and even venerated in biblical times for its large size and strength, and great men were usually buried in its shade. Abraham’s oak in Hebron is an example.<\/p>\n<p>A second oak is the valonia oak <em>(Q. aegilops),<\/em> perhaps the oak of Isaiah 2:13 and 44:14. It is common in the middle montane zones and probably was abundant in the area around Bashan. The oak of Genesis 35:4, 8 is thought to have been the holm oak <em>(Q. ilex),<\/em> an evergreen oak that grows to a height of 60 feet (18.3 meters). Still another oak is <em>Q. lusitanica,<\/em> the cypress oak, a small deciduous tree seldom more than 20 feet (6.1 meters) tall. The very large acorns of this tree were sometimes eaten.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “plain” (<span>kjv<\/span>) in Genesis 12:6, 13:18, 14:13, and 18:1 should probably be translated “oak.”<\/p>\n<p>The many references to “groves” in the OT, usually in connection with the worship of Baal or other heathen gods (Ex 34:13; Dt 16:21; Jgs 3:7; 1 Kgs 14:23; 18:19; 2 Kgs 17:16—all <span>kjv<\/span>), were probably groves of sacred oak trees.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OilTreeOleaster\">Oil Tree, Oleaster <em>(Elaeagnus angustifolia)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Small Eurasian tree with oblong silvery leaves, greenish flowers, and olivelike fruit. There is question as to which tree is referred to when 1 Kings 6:23, 31-33 and 1 Chronicles 27:28 refer to “olive trees.” The same word occurs in Isaiah 41:19 and Micah 6:7. The plant referred to is probably the narrow-leaved oleaster <em>(Elaeagnus angustifolia),<\/em> a small stiff-branched tree or graceful shrub growing from 15 to 20 feet (4.6 to 6.1 meters) tall, common in all parts of the Holy Land except in the Jordan Valley. At one time it was particularly common on Mt Tabor and at Hebron and Samaria. The wood is hard and fine-grained and therefore well suited for carving of images and figures. The oil that it yields is a rather inferior type used in medication but not for food; this may be the oil of Micah 6:7.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Oleander\">Oleander <em>(Nerium oleander)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any poisonous evergreen shrub of this genus growing in warm climates. One of the suggestions for the plants identified as “roses” in various translations (Ecclus 24:14, <span>kjv<\/span>) is the oleander. This plant, originally native to the East Indies, has been cultivated throughout the warm regions of the world for centuries. It flourishes in the Holy Land today and forms dense thickets in some parts of the Jordan Valley. It is usually a shrub from 3 to 12 feet (.9 to 3.7 meters) tall. Every part of the plant is dangerously poisonous.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OliveOliveTree\">Olive, Olive Tree <em>(Olea europaea)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Old world semitropical evergreen tree bearing edible fruit. The olive, <em>Olea europaea,<\/em> was unquestionably one of the most valuable trees known to the Jews. There are innumerable references to it in Scripture, as well as to olive oil, which was used for anointing. The tree is quite common in the Holy Land, and in many places it is the only tree of any substantial size. The branches of the wild olive are rather stiff and spinescent, and the typical cultivated tree is a multi-branched evergreen, 20 or more feet (6.1 meters) tall, with a gnarled trunk and smooth, ash-colored bark. The leaves are leathery and the flowers are small, yellow or white. The fruits are large, black or violet, ripening in September, and it is the outer fleshy parts of the fruit that yield the valuable olive oil of commerce. Thirty-one percent of the ripe fruit is oil. The ripe fruit is eaten raw, as is the green, unripe fruit. The wood of the trunk and limbs is hard, rich yellow or amber in color, and fine-grained, often handsomely variegated. It is still used today for the finest cabinetwork and turnery. The tree grows very slowly, but it attains a great age. It is difficult to kill the olive tree by cutting it down, because new sprouts are sent up from the root and all around the margins of the old stump, often forming a grove of two to five trunks, all from a single root that originally supported only one tree.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Onion\">Onion <em>(Allium)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The onions referred to in Numbers 11:5 are undoubtedly <em>Allium cepa,<\/em> the Egyptian onion, which is made up of a compact coated bulb formed of layers consisting of broad fleshy bases of closely overlapping leaves. The leaves are slender and hollow. The entire plant has a characteristic pungent taste and odor.<\/p>\n\n<p>Closely related to the onion is the garlic, <em>A. sativum.<\/em> The common garlic is a hardy, bulbous perennial plant that is cultivated in Europe, western Asia, and Egypt. The leaves are narrow, flat, and ribbonlike. It is extremely popular with people of the Mediterranean region.<\/p>\n<p>Still another one of the onions is the leek, <em>A. porrum.<\/em> The bulb of the leek differs from that of the onion and garlic in that it is slender, cylindrical, and more than six inches (15.2 centimeters) in length. The flavor resembles that of the onion but is more pungent. The leaves are eaten as a relish or are cooked in soups. The bulbs are cut into small pieces and employed as seasoning for meat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Palm\">Palm <em>(Phoenix dactylifera)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The palm tree of the Bible is undoubtedly the date palm. At one time it was as characteristic of the Holy Land as it is still today of Egypt. It is characterized by a branchless, tapering stem of up to 80 feet (24.2 meters) or more in height and a large terminal cluster of feathery leaves, each six to nine feet (1.8 to 2.7 meters) or more long. Because of its height and unusual structure, it was natural that it should be used as a form of ornamentation in Eastern architecture. The stem and leaves were favorite subjects of architectural embellishment. The immense, branchlike leaves that are referred to as branches in the Bible were symbols of triumph and were used on occasions of great rejoicing (Jn 12:13; Rv 7:9). The large leaves are still used to cover the roofs and sides of houses and to give solidity to reed fences. Mats, baskets, and even dishes are made of them. Small leaves are used as dusters, and the wood of the trunk is used for timber. Rope is made from the weblike integument in the crown. The fruit, borne in an immense drooping cluster, which may weigh from 30 to 50 pounds (13.6 to 22.7 kilograms), is the chief food of many natives of Arabia and north Africa. A single tree may yield up to 200 pounds (90.7 kilograms) of dates a year. They may be dried for future use.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Papyrus\">Papyrus <em>(Cyperus papyrus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Egyptian bulrush or papyrus (Ex 2:3-5; Jb 8:11; Is 18:2; 19:6-7; 35:7; 58:5) has smooth three-sided stems ordinarily attaining a height of 8 to 10 feet (2.4 to 3 meters), but sometimes even 16 feet (4.9 meters), and a thickness of two to three inches (5.1 to 7.6 centimeters) at the base with a large tuft of florets at the end. The papyrus formerly grew in great abundance along the banks of the Nile, forming what was almost a dense jungle. Today it is practically extinct in lower Egypt, although it is still found along the White Nile and in the Sudan. The papyrus still grows in parts of the Holy Land, especially around the north end of the plain of Galilee and the Huleh swamps.<\/p>\n\n<p>In addition to being used for making small vessels to float in water (Ex 2:3), for mats, and for various other domestic purposes, it is best known as the source of ancient paper. In manufacturing paper from papyrus, the stems of the plant were first peeled and the pitch then cut longitudinally into thin slices that were laid side by side. These were then sprinkled with water and pressed to unite the whole into one piece. The sheet was then dried and cut into pieces of the required size. In the better grades of papyrus paper, several layers of stem slices were laid crosswise on each other.<\/p>\n<p>The pale, fawn-colored, tassel-like inflorescences at the summit of the stems were used to adorn Egyptian temples and to crown the statues of gods. They were also worn as crowns by famous men and national heroes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PineTree\">Pine Tree <em>(Pinus brutia, P. halepensis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Various evergreen trees of this family with needle-shaped leaves in clusters and seed-bearing cones. While there is considerable confusion concerning the conifers of the Bible, it seems apparent that pines are referred to in such passages as Leviticus 23:40; Nehemiah 8:15; Isaiah 41:19; and 60:13. One of the Holy Land’s pines is the Brutian pine <em>(Pinus brutia),<\/em> a mountain-inhabiting species of the northern regions of Palestine. It attains a height of 10 to 35 feet (3 to 10.7 meters) with a rather diffuse growth and branches in whorls.<\/p>\n<p>Another of the pines is the Aleppo pine, <em>Pinus halepensis.<\/em> Most of the instances of the occurrence of “fir” or “fir tree” in the <span>kjv<\/span> probably refer to the Aleppo pine (2 Sm 6:5; 1 Kgs 5:8, 10; 6:34; 2 Kgs 19:23; 2 Chr 2:8; Ps 104:17; Sg 1:17; Is 14:8; 37:24; 55:13; 60:13; Ez 27:5; 31:8; Hos 14:8; Na 2:3; Zec 11:2). It grows from 9 to 60 feet (2.7 to 18.3 meters) tall with diffuse ascending branches and yellowish or brownish branchlets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Pistachio\">Pistachio <em>(Pistacia terebinthus, P. vera)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Palestine terebinth or turpentine tree is a large deciduous tree with straggling boughs. In the winter, without its leaves, it looks much like the oak. It grows from 12 to 25 feet (3.7 to 7.6 meters) tall. Every part of the tree contains a fragrant, resinous juice. It is common on the lower slopes of the hills throughout Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Arabia, generally growing as a solitary tree and found mostly in localities too warm or too dry for the oak that it generally replaces. Since it is native to Gilead, it is quite probable that its resinous juice formed part of the spicery that the Israelites carried to Egypt from Gilead (Gn 37:25).<\/p>\n<p>The nuts of Genesis 43:11 are apparently pistachio nuts from the pistachio tree, <em>Pistacia vera,<\/em> closely related to the terebinth. It attains a height of 10 to 30 feet (3 to 9.1 meters) with a spreading top. It is found wild in many rocky parts of Lebanon and the Holy Land. The nut has a light-colored shell and the kernel has a sweet delicate flavor much relished wherever it grows.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PlaneTree\">Plane Tree <em>(Platanus orientalis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several trees of this family with bell-shaped fruit clusters and usually an outer bark that flakes off in patches or strips. The references in Genesis 30:37 and Ezekiel 31:8 are apparently not to the chestnut tree, which is not indigenous to Palestine, but to the oriental plane tree, <em>Platanus orientalis.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The plane tree is a massive tree 60 feet (18.3 meters) or more tall with a trunk often of vast circumference, sometimes as much as 40 feet (12.2 meters). The outer bark peels off in sheets or scales, thus exposing a smooth whitish or yellowish inner bark. The tree is common throughout Lebanon, Syria, and the Holy Land, growing even in subalpine regions. However, it is primarily a tree of the plains and lowlands, growing on the edges of streams and lakes and in marshy places.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Pomegranate\">Pomegranate <em>(Punica granatum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The pomegranate is usually a small, bushlike tree but may occasionally become a large, branching shrub or small tree reaching a height of 20 to 30 feet (6.1 to 9.1 meters). The branches are often thorny. The showy bell-like flowers are usually scarlet, though sometimes yellow or white. The globular fruit is as large as an orange or medium-size apple. It has a hard rind of a bright red or yellowish color when ripe and is surmounted by the dry sepals that resemble a crown. The fruit itself is a crimson juicy pulp in which many red seeds are imbedded. The flowers of the pomegranate undoubtedly served as a pattern for the golden bells referred to in Exodus 28:33-34 and 39:24-26, and the open flowers of 1 Kings 6:32. The erect calyx lobes on the fruit served as a model for crowns of kings.<\/p>\n<p>The pomegranate is native to Asia, but it has been cultivated since prehistoric times and is now quite common in the Holy Land, in Egypt, and along the shores of the Mediterranean. It is listed as one of the pleasant fruits of Egypt (Nm 20:5) and one of the promised blessings of the Holy Land (Dt 8:8).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Poplar\">Poplar <em>(Populus euphratica, P. alba)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Fast-growing deciduous tree of the same genus as the aspen and cottonwood. The <span>kjv<\/span> references in 2 Samuel 5:23-24 and 1 Chronicles 14:14-15 to mulberry trees are more probably to the Euphrates poplar or aspen, <em>Populus euphratica.<\/em> This tree grows to a height of 30 to 45 feet (9.1 to 13.7 meters) with spreading branches. The Euphrates aspen is found only on rivers and stream banks throughout the area from Syria through the Holy Land to Stony Arabia. It is especially common in the Jordan Valley.<\/p>\n<p>The white poplar <em>(Populus alba)<\/em> is common in wet places in Syria, Lebanon, the Holy Land, and Sinai. It attains a height of 30 to 60 feet (9.1 to 18.3 meters) with spreading branches. Some suggest that the altars of various pagan religions were usually erected on the top of a hill and in the shade of a poplar grove.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Quince\">Quince <em>(Cydonia oblonga)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Tree native to western Asia, having white flowers and applelike fruit that is edible when cooked. Some believe that the “apples” of the OT were quinces, <em>Cydonia oblonga.<\/em> The quince tree is quite common in the Holy Land, though chiefly as a cultivated tree. It may occur wild in the northern parts of Syria. It is native to northern Persia and Asia Minor. The fruit is yellowish and highly fragrant, and it is the fragrance that caused it to be held in high regard by the ancients.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Reed\">Reed <em>(Juncus, Scirpus, Typha angustata, Arundo donax)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Numerous species of the rush and bulrush grow in the Holy Land. There are at least 21 varieties of rushes. The common soft rush or bog rush <em>(Juncus effusus)<\/em> is found in wet places, even in the Sinai and other deserts. The sea or hard rush <em>(J. maritimus)<\/em> is found in damp places throughout the Holy Land and even in Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>At least 15 kinds of bulrushes <em>(Scirpus)<\/em> are known in the Holy Land. The cluster-headed club rush <em>(Scirpus holoschoenus)<\/em> is common in damp places throughout the Holy Land to the Sinai. The lake club rush or tall bulrush <em>(S. lacustris)<\/em> is found in swamps and ditches throughout northern Africa to the Dead Sea. The sea club rush or salt marsh club rush <em>(S. maritimus)<\/em> is found in ditches and swamps in many places of the Holy Land. Any of these species may be the one referred to in Job 8:11; Isaiah 9:14; 19:6, 15.<\/p>\n<p>The reference in Genesis 41:2 to the feeding of cattle in the meadow seems to be to the tall reed <em>(Arundo donax),<\/em> which grows 18 feet (5.5 meters) or more in height. This plant is also known as the Persian reed and is common throughout the Holy Land, Syria, and the Sinai peninsula. It is a gigantic grass that may have a stem diameter of two or three inches (5.1 to 7.6 centimeters) at the base and is terminated by a plume of white flowers similar to those of the sugarcane or pampas grass. The plant was used for many purposes by the ancients: for walking sticks, fishing rods, measuring rods, and musical pipes. It is, therefore, quite possible that the “reed” of Matthew 27:48 and Mark 15:36 was a carpenter’s reed or measuring rod.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Papyrus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Rue\">Rue <em>(Ruta chalepensis, R. graveolens)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Aromatic Eurasian plant with evergreen leaves that yield an acrid, volatile oil once used in medicine. There is little question as to the correctness of the translation of “rue” in Luke 11:42, but there is some doubt as to the exact species. Most writers think that it was the common rue <em>(Rue graveolens),<\/em> a perennial shrubby plant with erect stems two to three feet (.6 to .9 meter) tall and deeply cut leaves. A very strong odor emanates from the foliage. This species is native to the Mediterranean region and grows wild in the Holy Land, especially on Mt Tabor.<\/p>\n<p>Rue was highly thought of by the ancients as a medicinal, supposed to prevent dizziness, dumbness, epilepsy, eye inflammations, insanity, and the “evil eye.” Rue was also used for seasoning dishes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Rush\">Rush <em>(Butomus umbellatus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Generic term for any of various grasslike marsh plants having pliant, hollow, or pithy stems. There is considerable uncertainty about the identification of the plant referred to in Genesis 41:2 translated in the <span>kjv<\/span> as “meadow,” and in Job 8:11 as “flag.” Since it is mentioned along with the papyrus in the Job passage, it seems that it refers to a specific kind of plant rather than to an aggregate of plants in a meadow. From the description in Genesis as being a plant on which Pharaoh’s cattle might feed along the banks of the Nile and yet not the papyrus, it may refer to the flowering rush or water gladiola <em>(Butomus umbellatus),<\/em> which flourishes both in Egypt and in the Holy Land, along with the papyrus.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Reed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Saffron\">Saffron <em>(Crocus sativus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Saffron, referred to in Song of Songs 4:14, is the product of several species of <em>Crocus,<\/em> especially of the blue-flowered saffron crocus <em>(C. sativus),<\/em> which is native to Greece and Asia Minor. The commercial product consists of the stigma and upper portions of the style, the top parts of the flower ovary, which are collected shortly after the flower opens. It requires at least 4,000 stigmas to make an ounce of saffron. After being gathered, the stigmas are dried in the sun, pounded, and made into small cakes. Saffron is used principally as a yellow dye and also as a fruit coloring for curries and stews.<\/p>\n<p>Another, entirely different kind of dye-producing plant <em>(Carthamus tinctorius)<\/em> called carthamine, bastard saffron, or safflower is a member of the thistle family. Its red florets yield a dye used extensively for coloring silk, in cooking, and for adulterating genuine saffron. It is an annual spiny plant three to four and a half feet (1.4 meters) tall, native to Syria and Egypt. In Egypt the grave clothes of mummies were dyed with this material, and it is quite possible that this plant may also have been the saffron of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sage\">Sage <em>(Salvia judaica)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Judean sage grows to three feet (.9 meter) tall in the mountains and hills of Palestine. Its stems are four-angled, stiff, and rough. The plant grows from Syria south through Nazareth, Hebron, Tiberius, Samaria, and Judea.<\/p>\n<p>This plant is the origin of the design of the seven-branched lampstand of Exodus 37:17-18, which is known as the menorah, the traditional Jewish symbol. The inflorescence of the plant, when pressed flat, has almost exactly the same shape and form as the seven-branched candlestick, with its central spike and three pairs of side branches each bending upward and inward in a symmetrical fashion. On each branch of the plant’s inflorescence are whorls or buds that perhaps give the idea for the “knops” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “knobs” on the biblical golden candlesticks.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Spelt\">Spelt <em>(Triticum aestivum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Hardy member of the wheat family. The rye of Exodus 9:32 and Isaiah 28:25, as well as the fitches of Ezekiel 4:9 (all <span>kjv<\/span>) are thought to be spelt. It is a hard-grained species of wheat with loose ears and grains triangular in cross-section, and was the most common form of wheat in early times. It has a stouter stem than wheat and strong spikes of grain. Bread made of its flour is much inferior to that made from wheat, but spelt will thrive in almost any kind of soil and will yield a crop on land that is unfit for wheat. The ancients preferred it to barley for bread.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"StoraxTree\">Storax Tree <em>(Styrax officinalis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Various trees of this genus yielding an aromatic resin. Today it is thought that the stacte of Exodus 30:34 was derived from the storax tree. It is an irregularly stiff-branched shrub or small tree 9 to 20 feet (2.7 to 6.1 meters) tall. This tree is abundant on low hills and rocky places from Lebanon through the Holy Land. Its gum is obtained by making incisions in the stems and branches. It is highly perfumed and is still prized today as a perfume.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sycamore\">Sycamore-fig <em>(Ficus sycomorus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Tree of northeastern Africa and adjacent Asia, related to the fig. The word translated “sycamore” in 1 Kings 10:27; 1 Chronicles 27:28; 2 Chronicles 1:15; 9:27; Psalm 78:47; Isaiah 9:10; Amos 7:14; and Luke 19:4 undoubtedly refers to the well-known sycamore-fig, which is also known as the mulberry-fig or fig-mulberry. It should not be confused with the common sycamore of the North American continent, which is actually a plane tree. The sycamore-fig of the Bible is a strong-growing, robust, wide-spreading tree growing 30 to 40 feet (9.1 to 12.2 meters) tall and sometimes attaining a trunk circumference of 20 feet (6.1 meters) or more with a crown 120 feet (36.6 meters) in diameter. It is a tree that is easily climbed and is frequently planted along roadsides, which accounts for the reference in Luke 19:4. It produces an abundant amount of fruit in clusters on all parts of the tree, on both young and old branches and even on the trunk itself. It is very similar to the common fig, only smaller and much inferior in quality. In David’s day it was so valuable that he appointed a special overseer for the sycamore trees (1 Chr 27:28). It is thought that Amos was not a gatherer of sycamore fruit but rather a dresser of sycamore trees.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Tamarisk\">Tamarisk <em>(Tamarix)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The references in Genesis 21:33 and 1 Samuel 22:6 and 31:13 seem to be to the tamarisk. These trees or shrubs are small and fast-growing with a durable wood. They are abundant in deserts, dunes, and salt marshes. <em>Tamarix aphylla<\/em> is leafless and has small white flowers. These trees or shrubs often provide a soothing touch of green foliage and a promise of cooling shade to the traveler. Tamarisks are able to survive because they either have small, scalelike leaves, which lose little moisture by transpiration, or no leaves at all. The larger of the tamarisks are valued for their wood in a region where wood is scarce. The wood was used for building and also as a source of an excellent type of charcoal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Terebinth\">Terebinth <em>(Pistacia terebinthus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Pistachio (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThistleThorn\">Thistle, Thorn <em>(Lycium europaeum, Solanum incanum, Centaurea, Silybum marianum, Ruscus aculeatus, Agrostemma githago, Paliurus spina-christi, Zizyphus spina-christi)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>There are 22 different Hebrew and Greek words used in Scripture to refer to spiny or prickly shrubs or weeds, and these are translated as “bramble,” “brier,” “cockle,” “thorn,” and “thistle.” At present, there are about 125 species of thorns and thistles that grow in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The bramble in the allegory of Judges 9:14-15 is believed to refer to the European boxthorn or desert-thorn, <em>Lycium europaeum.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The general consensus is that the “briers” of Isaiah 10:17, 55:13, Micah 7:4, and Hebrews 6:8 are the Palestine nightshade <em>(Solanum incanum),<\/em> or “Jericho potato.”<\/p>\n<p>The thistles of Genesis 3:17-18, 2 Kings 14:9, 2 Chronicles 25:18, Hosea 10:8, and Matthew 7:16, as well as the thorns of Matthew 13:7 and Hebrews 6:8, are thought to be one of the species of the thistle, <em>Centaurea.<\/em> Among the more common thistles in the Holy Land are the true star-thistle <em>(Centaurea calcitrapa),<\/em> the dwarf centaury <em>(C. verutum),<\/em> the Iberian centaury <em>(C. iberica),<\/em> and the lady’s thistle <em>(Silybum marianum).<\/em> Some thistles attain a height of five to six feet (.9 to 1.8 meters). Thistles are characteristic of an area that is uncultivated and neglected. Many have beautiful flowers, but all are covered with sharp spines.<\/p>\n<p>The references in Ezekiel 2:6 to “briers” and Ezekiel 28:24 to a “pricking brier” may be to the prickly butchers-broom or knee-holly, <em>Ruscus aculeatus.<\/em> The plant is common in rocky woods in the northern regions of the Holy Land, especially around Mt Tabor and Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>The cockle of Job 31:40 (<span>nlt<\/span> “weeds”) perhaps refers to the corn cockle, <em>Agrostemma githago.<\/em> This plant is common in grainfields throughout the Holy Land. It is a strong-growing and troublesome weed in grainfields, growing from one to three feet (.3 to .9 meter) tall.<\/p>\n<p>Many commentators think that the “thorns” out of which the crown of thorns (Mt 27:29; Jn 19:2) was made were from the Christ-thorn <em>(Paliurus spina-christi).<\/em> This belief has led to its specific name; the Christ-thorn is a spiny plant that ordinarily grows as a straggling shrub three to nine feet (.9 to 2.7 meters) tall. The flexible branches are armed at the base of each leaf with a pair of unequal, stiff, sharp spines. The unusual pliable texture of the young branches renders it particularly easy to plait into a crownlike wreath.<\/p>\n<p>The thorns of Judges 8:7, Isaiah 7:19, 9:18, 55:13, and Matthew 7:16 may refer to the Syrian Christ-thorn <em>(Zizyphus spina-christi),<\/em> a shrub or small tree 9 to 15 feet (2.7 to 4.6 meters) tall, sometimes growing into a 40-foot (12.2-meter) tree with smooth white branches bearing a pair of stout, unequal, recurved spines at the back of each leaf.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bramble; Buckthorn (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Tulip\">Tulip <em>(Tulipa montana, T. sharonensis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several bulbous plants of this family native to Asia. The rose of Sharon in Song of Songs 2:1 may be the mountain tulip, <em>Tulipa montana,<\/em> or the closely related Sharon tulip, <em>T. sharonensis.<\/em> The former is an attractive plant that grows from a bulb and has leaves that are often wavy-margined. The species is common in the mountainous regions of Syria, Lebanon, and the Anti-Lebanon. It is primarily a mountainous species. The Sharon tulip <em>(T. sharonensis)<\/em> is found in sandy places on the Sharon coastal plains.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Tumbleweed\">Tumbleweed <em>(Gundelia tournefortii, Anastatica hierochuntica)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The references in Psalm 83:13 to “whirling dust” and in Isaiah 17:13 to “wheel” or “rolling thing” (<span>niv<\/span> “tumbleweed”) seem to be to the Palestinian tumbleweed <em>(Gundelia tournefortii),<\/em> a member of the thistle family. It is a prickly herb with milky juice. It rolls over the land and gathers in tremendous heaps in hollows.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Vegetable\">Vegetable<\/p>\n<p>Scriptural references to vegetables are probably, in most cases, to the dried leguminous seeds of beans and lentils.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Vine\">Vine <em>(Vitis vinifera)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any plant with a flexible stem that climbs, twines, or creeps along a surface or support. The common grapevine <em>(Vitis vinifera)<\/em> is mentioned throughout the Bible. The fruitful vine (Ez 17:5-10) and the vine brought out of Egypt (Ps 80:8) were symbolic of the Jewish people. Jesus compares himself to the true vine, of which his disciples were the branches (Jn 15:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The grapevine of the Old World sometimes assumes the characteristics of a tree, with stems up to a foot and a half (45.7 centimeters) in diameter, the branches then being trained on a trellis and bearing bunches of grapes 10 to 12 pounds (4.5 to 5.4 kilograms) in weight, with the individual grapes the size of small plums. Bunches have been produced weighing as much as 26 pounds (11.8 kilograms). The vines of the Holy Land were always renowned both for the luxuriance of their growth and for the immense clusters of grapes they produced. Thus it does not seem improbable that the spies sent to the Promised Land should have employed a pole to transport some of the clusters home (Nm 13:23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The wild grape <em>(Vitis orientalis)<\/em> is referred to in Isaiah 5:2-4, Jeremiah 2:21, and Ezekiel 15:2-6. It is known as the native wild fox grape and has small, black, acidic berries about the size of currants with little juice.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Walnut\">Walnut <em>(Juglans regia)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several trees of this genus having round, sticky fruit enclosing an edible nut. The reference in Song of Songs 6:11 to “nuts” is thought to refer to the Persian or common walnut, <em>Juglans regia.<\/em> The tree is believed to have been indigenous to northern Persia, but it is actually found wild in many parts of northern India, eastward as far as China, and westward through Persia. At the time of Solomon, it was widely cultivated for its fruit throughout the East. Perhaps Solomon’s garden of nuts was a part of his extensive gardens at Etham, six miles (9.7 kilometers) from Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WaterLily\">Water Lily <em>(Nymphaea)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of numerous aquatic plants of this genus with floating leaves and showy flowers. The carved lily ornamentation of 1 Kings 7:19-26 and 2 Chronicles 4:5 was probably patterned after the flowers of the water lily. Few flowers can equal the Egyptian lotus or water lily <em>(Nymphaea lotus)<\/em> in beauty. It looks very much like a large white rose and at one time floated in profusion on the waters of the Nile.<\/p>\n<p>The common European white water lily <em>(N. alba)<\/em> was also familiar to the children of Israel. It grows not only in Europe but also in the Holy Land and North Africa. It is, however, not as common in Egypt as is the white lotus.<\/p>\n<p>Another water lily with which the Israelites were probably familiar is the blue lotus, <em>N. caerulea.<\/em> Its leaves are 12 to 16 inches (30.5 to 40.6 centimeters) across and it has light-blue flowers that are three to six inches (7.6 to 15.2 centimeters) in diameter.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wheat\">Wheat <em>(Triticum aestivum, T. compositum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Various cereal grasses of this family widely cultivated for its edible grain. Five kinds of wheat are native to—and still wild in—the Holy Land, and at least eight others are cultivated there today; probably most, if not all, were known in Bible times. The wild varieties were probably more abundant then than they are today. Among these are the einkorn <em>(T. monococcum),<\/em> the thaoudar <em>(T. thaoudar),<\/em> and the wild emmer <em>(T. dicoccoides).<\/em> The composite wheat <em>(T. compositum),<\/em> with its branched spikes, often bearing as many as seven heads per stalk, is definitely referred to in Genesis 41:5-57. It is depicted on numerous Egyptian monuments and on inscriptions and is still commonly seen in the Nile Delta, where it is known as “mummy wheat.” It is also cultivated in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The most frequently mentioned wheat of the Bible is undoubtedly the commonly cultivated summer and winter wheat, <em>Triticum aestivum.<\/em> It is an abundant annual grass cultivated in Egypt and other Eastern lands since earliest times. The exact place of its origin is unknown. Grains of wheat have been found in the most ancient Egyptian tombs and in the remains of prehistoric lake dwellings in Switzerland. It was certainly the chief grain of Mesopotamia in Jacob’s time (Gn 30:14).<\/p>\n<p>Corn in biblical days often included a mixture of peas, beans, lentils, cummin, barley, millet, and spelt, but wheat was always its main constituent. Egypt was a great grain-producing country, and Abram (Gn 12:10) and Joseph’s brothers (ch 42) naturally turned to Egypt for wheat when famine visited Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>The mills, millstones, granaries, and threshing floors mentioned in the Bible all refer to equipment employed in processing grain to produce flour. The fine flour of which the showbread loaves were made (Lv 24:5) was unquestionably wheat flour. Wheat intended for home consumption was often stored in the central part of the house; this explains the story told in 2 Samuel 4:6. It was also sometimes stored in dry wells (2 Sm 17:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wormwood\">Wormwood <em>(Artemisia judaica, A. herba-alba)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Wormwood is a general name given to a group of woody plants with a strong aromatic odor. Wormwood plants have a strong, bitter taste, and their young shoots and branch tips furnish the “wormwood” of commerce. Its bitter taste accounts for its being spoken of with gall—as being symbolic of bitter calamity and sorrow (Prv 5:4; Jer 9:15; 23:15; Lam 3:15, 19). <em>Artemisia herba-alba<\/em> is the common species of wormwood in the Holy Land today. It is strongly aromatic, smelling like camphor, and bitter. <em>A. judaica<\/em> occurs only in the Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>Absinthe is made from species of this group. It first leads to greater activity and pleasant sensations and fills the mind with grandiose ideas (Lam 3:15). The habitual use of it, however, brings on a stupor and gradual diminution of intellectual faculties, ending in delirium and even death. Perhaps the hemlock of Amos 6:12 was wormwood.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PLANTS<\/h3>\n<p>Identifying biblical plants has always been a difficult task, partly because people continue to identify the biblical elm, sycamore, lily, rose, and vine with modern plants, and also because they assume that all the plants now growing in the Holy Land were there in ancient biblical days, or that the plants referred to in the Bible are still to be found there today. Unfortunately, many plants now quite common in the Holy Land were not there in biblical days. Many plants that once grew in abundance in the Holy Land are now extinct. Some have been driven out by foreign invaders; others have been exterminated or nearly exterminated by overcultivation of the land, the destruction of forests, and the resulting changes in climatic and other environmental conditions. At one time the Holy Land was a land of palm trees, with the date palm as abundant and characteristic there as it was in Egypt, but today the date palm is much less common. Similarly, in antiquity, the towering cedars clothed the slopes of Lebanon and other mountain ranges. Now the few remaining specimens must be carefully fenced in to protect them against trampling and the ravages of goats.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Acacia<\/p>\n<p>• Acanthus<\/p>\n<p>• Algum<\/p>\n<p>• Almond<\/p>\n<p>• Almug<\/p>\n<p>• Aloe<\/p>\n<p>• Apple<\/p>\n<p>• Apricot<\/p>\n<p>• Ash<\/p>\n<p>• Aspen<\/p>\n<p>• Balm<\/p>\n<p>• Barley<\/p>\n<p>• Bdellium<\/p>\n<p>• Bean<\/p>\n<p>• Bitter Herbs<\/p>\n<p>• Boxthorn, European<\/p>\n<p>• Box Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Bramble<\/p>\n<p>• Broom<\/p>\n<p>• Buckthorn<\/p>\n<p>• Bush<\/p>\n<p>• Buttercup<\/p>\n<p>• Calamus<\/p>\n<p>• Cane<\/p>\n<p>• Caper Plant<\/p>\n<p>• Carob Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Cassia<\/p>\n<p>• Castor Oil Plant<\/p>\n<p>• Cedar<\/p>\n<p>• Chicory<\/p>\n<p>• Cinnamon<\/p>\n<p>• Citron Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Coriander<\/p>\n<p>• Cotton<\/p>\n<p>• Cucumber<\/p>\n<p>• Cummin<\/p>\n<p>• Cypress<\/p>\n<p>• Dandelion<\/p>\n<p>• Darnel Grass<\/p>\n<p>• Dill<\/p>\n<p>• Ebony<\/p>\n<p>• Endive<\/p>\n<p>• Fig, Fig Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Fir Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Flax<\/p>\n<p>• Frankincense<\/p>\n<p>• Galbanum<\/p>\n<p>• Garlic<\/p>\n<p>• Gourd, Wild<\/p>\n<p>• Hedge<\/p>\n<p>• Henna<\/p>\n<p>• Hyacinth<\/p>\n<p>• Hyssop<\/p>\n<p>• Juniper<\/p>\n<p>• Laurel or Sweet Bay<\/p>\n<p>• Leek<\/p>\n<p>• Lentil<\/p>\n<p>• Lettuce<\/p>\n<p>• Lily<\/p>\n<p>• Lotus Bush<\/p>\n<p>• Mallow<\/p>\n<p>• Mandrake<\/p>\n<p>• Melon<\/p>\n<p>• Millet<\/p>\n<p>• Mint<\/p>\n<p>• Mulberry<\/p>\n<p>• Mustard<\/p>\n<p>• Myrrh<\/p>\n<p>• Myrtle<\/p>\n<p>• Narcissus<\/p>\n<p>• Nard<\/p>\n<p>• Nettle<\/p>\n<p>• Nutmeg Flower<\/p>\n<p>• Oak<\/p>\n<p>• Oil Tree, Oleaster<\/p>\n<p>• Oleander<\/p>\n<p>• Olive, Olive Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Onion<\/p>\n<p>• Palm<\/p>\n<p>• Papyrus<\/p>\n<p>• Pine Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Pistachio<\/p>\n<p>• Plane Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Pomegranate<\/p>\n<p>• Poplar<\/p>\n<p>• Quince<\/p>\n<p>• Reed<\/p>\n<p>• Rue<\/p>\n<p>• Rush<\/p>\n<p>• Saffron<\/p>\n<p>• Sage<\/p>\n<p>• Spelt<\/p>\n<p>• Storax Tree<\/p>\n<p>• Sycamore<\/p>\n<p>• Tamarisk<\/p>\n<p>• Terebinth<\/p>\n<p>• Thistle, Thorn<\/p>\n<p>• Tulip<\/p>\n<p>• Tumbleweed<\/p>\n<p>• Vegetable<\/p>\n<p>• Vine<\/p>\n<p>• Walnut<\/p>\n<p>• Water Lily<\/p>\n<p>• Wheat<\/p>\n<p>• Wormwood<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Acacia\">Acacia <em>(Acacia tortilis<\/em> and <em>A. seyal)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any tree or shrub of the mimosa family of plants growing in warm regions. The plant referred to in the <span>kjv<\/span> as “shittah” (singular) or “shittim” (plural) is undoubtedly the acacia tree, the only timber tree of any considerable size in the Arabian desert. <em>Acacia tortilis<\/em> is by far the largest and most common tree in the desert in which the Israelites wandered for 40 years. It is especially conspicuous on Mt Sinai and was probably the species used for the tabernacle furnishings. <em>A. seyal<\/em> is less common, at least today. It can grow as high as 25 feet (7.6 meters), and bears yellow flowers on twisted branches. The wood is close grained, heavy and hard, orange-brown in color, and much valued in cabinetwork. The ancient Egyptians clamped shut mummy coffins with acacia wood.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Acanthus\">Acanthus <em>(Acanthus syriacus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The acanthus, perhaps referred to in Job 30:7 and Zephaniah 2:9, is a perennial thistlelike herb or small shrub about three feet (.9 meter) tall, and is a common weed in all Eastern countries. It has been used since time immemorial as a model for the leaf or scroll decorations in art.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Algum\">Algum <em>(Juniperus excelsa Bieb)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The timber from Lebanon referred to in 2 Chronicles 2:8 is probably the juniper. Some translators hold, however, that algum and almug are Hebrew variants for the same tree (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg, 2 Chr 2:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Almug (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Almond\">Almond <em>(Amygdalus communis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The almond is a peachlike tree with saw-toothed pointed leaves and gray bark. It grows to a height of from 10 to 25 feet (3 to 7.6 meters). It blooms very early in the year; its Hebrew name has its roots in “watch for.” To the Jews it was a welcome harbinger of spring (Jer 1:11).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Almug\">Almug <em>(Pterocarpus santalinus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The precious wood imported by King Solomon and used in making the pillars for the temple and for making harps and psalteries (1 Kgs 10:11-12). This timber was brought by sea from Ophir to Ezion-geber, near Elath. Modern authorities suggest that Ophir was either in Arabia, India, or East Africa near Mozambique. The reference to “algum“ in 2 Chronicles 2:8 is possibly to this tree. <em>See<\/em> Algum (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Aloe\">Aloe <em>(Aloe succotrina, Aquilaria agallocha)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Chiefly African, lilylike plant of the genus <em>Aloes,<\/em> certain species of which yield a drug and a fiber. Aloe is an aromatic substance mentioned in the Bible, together with myrrh, balm, and other fragrant plants (Ps 45:8; Prv 7:17; Sg 4:14; Jn 19:39). Most scholars think these passages refer to two different plants. The OT plant is likely to have been <em>Aquilaria agallocha,<\/em> the eaglewood, a large tree growing up to 120 feet (36.6 meters) tall with a trunk 12 feet (3.7 meters) in circumference. It is native to northern India, Malaya, and Indochina. The decaying wood is highly fragrant, and as such is highly valued as perfume and incense and for fumigation.<\/p>\n<p>The aloe of John 19:39 is thought to be the true aloe <em>(Aloe succotrina),<\/em> the juice of which was used by the Egyptians in embalming. Its smell, however, is not very agreeable, and it has a bitter taste. It is sometimes used by veterinarians as a horse medicine.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Apple\">Apple <em>(Malus sylvestris)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The identity of the fruit identified by the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tappuach<\/span> (Prv 25:11; Sg 2:3, 5; 7:8; 8:5) continues to be debated. In most English translations it has been rendered “apple” because of its close linguistic tie to the Arabic word <em>tuffah.<\/em> Many scholars identify this tree as the apricot, questioning whether apples fit the biblical description “apples of gold” and whether the apple tree was cultivated in ancient Palestine. Recent excavations at Kadesh-barnea, however, have uncovered carbonized apples, probably a crab apple <em>(Malus sylvestris),<\/em> dating to the ninth century <span>BC<\/span>. This would certainly allow for this ornamental apple’s cultivation in Solomon’s gardens.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apricot (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Apricot\">Apricot <em>(Prunus armeniaca)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The identification of the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tappuach<\/span> with the apricot continues to be debated. The apricot tree produces yellow-orange peachlike edible fruit and is native to western Asia and Africa. It is abundant in the Holy Land and probably has been so since early biblical times. The tree is a round-headed reddish-barked tree growing 30 feet (9.1 meters) tall. Most translations render this Hebrew word “apple,” though many scholars identify it with the apricot because of its descriptions in the biblical text (see Prv 25:11; Sg 2:3, 5; 7:8; 8:5; Jl 1:12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apple (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ash\">Ash <em>(Alhagi maurorum, Fraxinus ornus, Tamarix mannifera)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>There are several ash trees found in the Near East. One of these, the prickly alhagi <em>(Alhagi maurorum),<\/em> is a member of the pea family. It is a low, many-stemmed, much-branched shrub growing about three feet (.9 meter) tall with somewhat hairy twigs and pealike flowers. During the heat of the day, leaves exude a sweet, gummy substance that hardens in the air and is collected by shaking the bushes over a spread-out cloth.<\/p>\n<p>The manna tamarisk <em>(Tamarix mannifera)<\/em> is a multibranched shrub or a small tree 9 to 15 feet (2.7 to 4.6 meters) tall with rigid branches that have tiny pink flowers. It is found on deserts from the Holy Land to Arabia and the Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>The flowering or manna ash <em>(Fraxinus ornus)<\/em> is a tree that grows from 15 to 50 feet (4.6 to 15.2 meters) tall. The fruits are very similar to those produced by our species of ash. The ash of Isaiah 44:14 (<span>kjv<\/span>) is believed to be the Aleppo pine.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Aspen\">Aspen <em>(Populus euphratica<\/em> or <em>P. tremula)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several trees of the genus <em>Populus<\/em> with leaves attached by flattened leafstalks so that they tremble or “quake” in the wind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Balm\">Balm <em>(Balanites aegyptiaca, Pistacia lentiscus, Commiphora opobalsamum<\/em><em>)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>An oily aromatic resin exuded by chiefly tropical trees and shrubs and used medicinally; trees and shrubs producing this substance. References in Genesis 37:25, Jeremiah 8:22, 46:11, and 51:8 are thought to be either the Jericho balsam <em>(Balanites aegyptiaca)<\/em> or the lentisk or mastic tree <em>(Pistacia lentiscus).<\/em> The Jericho balsam is very common in Egypt, North Africa, the plains of Jericho, and the hot plains bordering on the Dead Sea. It is a small desert-loving plant, 9 to 15 feet (2.7 to 4.6 meters) tall, with slender, thorny branches and small clusters of green flowers.<\/p>\n<p>The lentisk or mastic tree is native to the Holy Land, and the reference in Genesis 43:11 is probably to this plant, since the implication is that this is a native product of the Holy Land unknown in Egypt at the time. This tree is a shrubby or bushy tree 3 to 10 feet (.9 to 3 meters) tall with evergreen leaves. The “balm” is a fragrant gummy exudation of the sap secured by making incisions in the stems and branches, usually in August. The best grades are in the form of yellow-white translucent tears or drops; they are employed in medicine as an astringent. The poorer grades are used extensively as a varnish. Children in the East use it as chewing gum.<\/p>\n<p>References to spices in 1 Kings 10:10, 2 Kings 20:13, Song of Songs 3:6, Isaiah 39:2, and Ezekiel 27:17 are thought to be the balm of Gilead <em>(Commiphora opobalsamum),<\/em> which in spite of its name is not a native of Gilead or even of the Holy Land but is indigenous to Arabia, especially the mountainous regions of Yemen. The trees were still in existence on the plain of Jericho at the time of the Roman conquest. The Roman conquerors carried branches to Rome as trophies of their victory over the Jews.<\/p>\n<p>This tree is a small, stiff-branched evergreen tree seldom more than 15 feet (4.6 meters) high with straggling branches. The “balm” is obtained by making incisions in the stem and branches of the tree. The sap soon hardens into small irregular nodules that are collected. Gum is also procured from green and ripe fruit.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Myrrh (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Barley\">Barley <em>(Hordeum distichon)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>A cereal grass bearing bearded flower spikes and edible seeds. The common barley <em>(Hordeum distichon),<\/em> the winter barley <em>(H. hex<\/em><em>astichon),<\/em> and the spring barley <em>(H. vulgare)<\/em> have been cultivated in temperate regions of the world since time immemorial and today still constitute one of the principal grain foods. Barley and wheat were the two staple cereal crops of Egypt and the Holy Land. Being less expensive, barley was mostly used for feeding cattle, although it was also used by itself or mixed with wheat and other seed as food for man (Ez 4:9-12). Barley is mentioned in the Bible over 30 times, either as a plant growing in the fields or in reference to products made from it, such as barley meal, barley bread, barley cakes, and barley loaves. As the common food of the poor, barley was also regarded as a symbol of poverty and cheapness or worthlessness (Hos 3:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bdellium\">Bdellium <em>(Commiphora africana)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Aromatic gum resin similar to myrrh, produced by various trees of the genus <em>Commiphora<\/em> of Africa and western Asia. The reference in Genesis 2:12 and Numbers 11:7 to bdellium is thought by most scholars today to refer to a gum resin, obtained from a shrub, <em>Commiphora africana<\/em>, that grows in south Arabia and northeastern Africa. The resin is yellowish, transparent, and fragrant, and looks like a pearl.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bean\">Bean <em>(Faba vulgaris)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The references in 2 Samuel 17:27-28 and Ezekiel 4:9 are generally regarded as referring to the broad bean. This species, an annual plant, is thought originally to have grown in northern Persia, but it was extensively cultivated in western Asia in very early times as a food plant. Beans have been found in the mummy coffins of Egyptian tombs, and they were also cultivated by the Greeks and Romans.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BitterHerbs\">Bitter Herbs <em>(Cichorium endivia, Taraxacum officinale, Lactuca sativa)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The “bitter herbs” of Exodus 12:8 and Numbers 9:11 seem to have been plants like endive <em>(Cichorium endivia),<\/em> the common chicory <em>(Cichorium intybus),<\/em> lettuce <em>(Lactuca sativa),<\/em> or the common dandelion <em>(Taraxacum officinale).<\/em> These are all weedy plants common in modern Egypt and western Asia and are still eaten by people living there. The leaves of the ordinary garden lettuce are intensely bitter when bleached. This is also true of the common dandelion. Others suggest that the bitter herbs were derived from thorns and thistles.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BoxthornEuropean\">Boxthorn, European <em>(Lycium europaeum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Various thorny shrubs, some species of which bear purplish flowers and brightly colored berries. The reference in Judges 9:14-15 is thought to be to the European boxthorn or desert-thorn. It is a thorny shrub 6 to 12 feet (1.8 to 3.7 meters) tall with clustered leaves and small violet flowers eventually producing small globular red berries. It is native to and common throughout the Holy Land, especially in the region from Lebanon to the Dead Sea.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BoxTree\">Box Tree <em>(Buxus longifolia)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The long-leaved box tree is a hardy evergreen tree found in the mountainous regions of the northern part of the Holy Land, the Galilean hills, and Lebanon. It grows to a height of about 20 feet (6.1 meters) with a slender trunk seldom more than six to eight inches (15.2 to 20.3 centimeters) in diameter. Its wood is very hard and takes a fine polish. It was cultivated by the Romans for its hard wood, which they inlaid with ivory for cabinets and jewel caskets. Scriptural references include Isaiah 41:19 and 60:13.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bramble\">Bramble <em>(Rubus sanctus, R. ulmifolius)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Palestinian bramble <em>(Rubus sanctus)<\/em> and the closely related elm-leaf bramble <em>(R. ulmifolius)<\/em> are prickly evergreen shrubs that spread by means of suckers. The stems and young shoots are covered with a characteristic bloom or whitish powder and short hairs. The prickles are strong, erect, and hairy. The flowers are white, pink, rose, or purple in color, and the fruit is round and black.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Thistle, Thorn (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Broom\">Broom <em>(Retama raetam)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>A shrub native to Eurasia. The word translated “juniper” in the <span>kjv<\/span> has nothing to do with the true junipers but refers rather to a species of broom, known as the white broom <em>(Retama raetam).<\/em> Its branches are longer and flexible, forming an erect, dense bush 3 to 12 feet (.9 to 3.7 meters) tall. The leaves are small and sparse, yet it forms an agreeable shade in a desert region. The white pealike flowers are sweet and very fragrant and are borne in clusters along the twigs. It is a beautiful shrub that grows in the desert regions of Palestine, Syria, and Persia. In many desert areas it is the only bush that affords any shade (1 Kgs 19:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>The “juniper roots” of Job 30:4 are not the roots of either the juniper or white broom. The roots of the latter are very nauseating and could not be eaten in the manner described by Job. Job’s “juniper roots” were probably an edible parasitic plant <em>(Cynomorium coccineum).<\/em> This plant grows in salt marshes and maritime sands. It is frequently eaten in times of food scarcity and at one time was highly prized for its supposed medicinal value in the treatment of dysentery.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Buckthorn\">Buckthorn <em>(Rhamnus palaestina)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Palestinian buckthorn is a shrub or small tree attaining a height of three to six feet (.9 to 1.8 meters) with velvety, thorny branches, evergreen leaves, and clusters of small flowers blooming in March or April. It grows in thickets and on hillsides from Syria and Lebanon through the Holy Land to Arabia and the Sinai.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bush\">Bush <em>(Acacia nilotica, Loranthus acaciae)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Low, branching, woody plant, usually smaller than a tree. There are differences of opinion in regard to the bush out of which the Lord appeared to Moses (Ex 3:2-4). From the biblical account, it seems most likely that the event was a miraculous one. However, some seek a natural explanation and believe that the burning bush may have been the crimson-flowered mistletoe or acacia strap flower <em>(Loranthus acaciae),<\/em> which grows in great profusion as a partial parasite on the various acacia shrubs, such as the thorny acacia <em>(Acacia nilotica),<\/em> in the Holy Land and Sinai. When in full bloom, the mistletoe imparts to the shrub or tree the appearance of being on fire because its brilliant flame-colored blossoms stand out against the green foliage and yellow flowers of the host plants.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Buttercup\">Buttercup <em>(Ranunculus asiaticus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Persian buttercup is one of the flowers or grasses of the field (Mt 6:28-30). It is a showy plant blooming in all brilliant colors except blue, with double flowers sometimes measuring two inches (5.1 centimeters) across.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Calamus\">Calamus <em>(Acorus calamus, Andropogon aroma<\/em><em>ticus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>A plant, or its aromatic root; any of a variety of tropical Asiatic palms. One of the plants that grew in Solomon’s garden (Sg 4:14). The sweet flag <em>(Acorus<\/em> <em>calamus)<\/em> and the beardgrass <em>(Andropogon aromaticus)<\/em> have been suggested as the plants from which calamus came. The sweet flag is highly aromatic and grows in Europe and Asia, but it is not known in the Holy Land. Indigenous to India, beardgrass is highly odoriferous when bruised and is thought to have furnished the calamus of the Bible. It yields an oil known as ginger-grass oil.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cane\">Cane <em>(Saccharum officinarum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>It is thought that there were two species of sugarcane indigenous to and growing wild in the Holy Land. One of these, <em>Saccharum sara,<\/em> is known to be only from Lebanon. The other native species is <em>S. biflorum,<\/em> which grows on the banks of ditches and streams from Syria and Lebanon through the Holy Land south to Stony Arabia and the Sinai. This may be the wild cane familiar to the Jews. Most authorities, however, think that the “sweet cane” of Isaiah 43:24 was the true sugarcane <em>(S. officinarum).<\/em> This plant is thought to have originated in the tropics of the eastern hemisphere. It has been cultivated by people since time immemorial and is not now known in the wild state anywhere. It is a tall, stout perennial grass, maizelike in aspect with many jointed stems and a large plumelike terminal cluster of flowers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CaperPlant\">Caper Plant <em>(Capparis sincula)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Spiny, trailing shrub of Mediterranean region; the flower bud of this shrub. The word “desire” in Ecclesiastes 12:5 may actually refer to the caper berry. The common caper or caper berry grows profusely in Syria, Lebanon, the Holy Land, and in the mountain valleys of Sinai. The plant may sometimes grow upright but more generally spreads itself weakly over the ground like a vine, covering rocks, ruins, and old walls like ivy. The young flower buds, pickled in vinegar, were used by the ancients as a condiment for meat. The berries were also used in cooking.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CarobTree\">Carob Tree <em>(Ceratonia siliqua)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Evergreen of the Mediterranean region having edible pods. Scholars generally agree that the pods of the carob or locust tree were the “husks” of Jesus’ parable of the prodigal son (Lk 15:16). The carob is an attractive evergreen leguminous tree that is very common throughout the Holy Land, Syria, and Egypt. The pods are most abundant in April and May and contain numerous pealike seeds embedded in an agreeably flavored mucilaginous sweetish pulp. The pods are also used abundantly now as they were in antiquity for feeding cattle, horses, and pigs. In time of scarcity, they are used as human food and perhaps even regularly by the very poor. The carob is frequently mentioned in the Talmud as a source of good food for domestic animals. The seeds of the carob were formerly employed as a standard of weight and are the source of the term “carat.” Some commentators suggest that the “locusts” eaten by John the Baptist (Mt 3:4) were not insects but the fruit of the carob tree.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cassia\">Cassia <em>(Cinnamomum cassia, Saussurea lappa)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Tree of tropical Asia with bark similar but inferior to cinnamon. The “cassia” of Exodus 30:24 and Ezekiel 27:19 is the cassia bark tree, <em>Cinnamomum cassia.<\/em> In Psalm 45:8 the reference seems to be to the Indian orris, <em>Saussurea lappa.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CastorOilPlant\">Castor Oil Plant <em>(Ricinus communis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Large plant, native to tropical Africa and Asia, cultivated for ornamental reasons and for extraction of oil from its seeds. The gourd of Jonah 4:6-7 was probably the ordinary castor bean. The castor bean is a tender shrub, growing 3 to 12 or more feet (.9 to 3.7 meters) tall with huge leaves that resemble the outstretched human hand. The castor bean plant is found in waste places, especially near water, in both Lebanon and the Holy Land and often is cultivated. In hot climates it becomes treelike and affords a dense shade by the abundance of its huge, umbrella-like leaves. It is known in the Orient for the rapidity of its growth. The oil extracted from the seeds of the castor bean was used by the Jews in ceremonial rites and is mentioned among the five kinds of oil that rabbinical tradition sanctioned for such use. The seeds themselves are poisonous when eaten.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cedar\">Cedar <em>(Cedrus libani)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several coniferous evergreen trees of the genus native to the Old World. With few exceptions, the references to “cedar” are to the well-known cedar of Lebanon. This is a noble tree, the tallest and most massive with which the Israelites were acquainted. It grows quite rapidly, attaining a height of up to 120 feet (36.6 meters) with a trunk diameter of as much as 8 feet (2.4 meters). In Solomon’s day these trees were obviously abundant on the mountains of Lebanon, but now, because of excessive lumbering, they are very rare. The cedar of Lebanon was held in high esteem not only for its vigor, beauty, and age but also for the fragrance and remarkable lasting qualities of the wood. It symbolizes grandeur, might, majesty, dignity, lofty stature, and wide expansion. References in Ezekiel 17:3, 22-24, and 31:3-18 beautifully illustrate how these lofty kings of the forest symbolize and typify worldly strength, power, and glory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Chicory\">Chicory <em>(Cichorium intybus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Bitter Herbs (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cinnamon\">Cinnamon <em>(Cinnamomum zeylanicum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of trees of this genus, native to tropical Asia, with aromatic bark that, when ground, is used as a spice. The cinnamon of Exodus 30:23, Proverbs 7:17, Song of Songs 4:14, and Revelation 18:13 is undoubtedly <em>Cinnamomum zeylanicum.<\/em> The tree is a rather low-growing one, never getting more than 30 feet (9.1 meters) high, with a smooth, ash-colored bark and widespread branches and white flowers. Its shiny, beautifully veined evergreen leaves grow about nine inches (22.9 centimeters) long and two inches (5.1 centimeters) wide.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews always regarded cinnamon as a deliciously fragrant substance and valued it highly as a spice and a perfume. It was one of the principal ingredients used in the manufacture of the precious ointments, or “holy oil,” that Moses was commanded to use in the tabernacle for anointing the sacred vessels and officiating priests. It was undoubtedly very costly and precious.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CitronTree\">Citron Tree <em>(Tetraclinis articulata)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Tree native to Asia bearing lemonlike fruit with a thick, fragrant rind. It seldom exceeds a height of 30 feet (9.1 meters) and has hard, dark-colored, durable, fragrant wood that takes a fine polish. The wood was one of the most highly prized woods of the ancients, who employed it extensively for cabinetwork. It was commonly referred to as being worth its weight in gold. The wood, owing to its resinous properties, is slow to decay and remains practically uninjured by insects.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Coriander\">Coriander <em>(Coriandrum sativum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The references in Exodus 16:31 and Numbers 11:7 are clearly to the common coriander plant. The coriander was found quite commonly growing along with grain in cultivated fields throughout the Holy Land. It grows wild in Egypt and was used by the ancients both as condiment and as a medicine. The leaves are quite aromatic and are used in soups and for flavoring puddings, curries, and wines. The coriander is still used today as a spice by the Arabs. In Scripture it is mentioned only in connection with manna, which was said to resemble coriander seeds in size, shape, and color.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cotton\">Cotton <em>(Gossypium herbaceum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of various plants or shrubs of this genus grown in warm climates for the soft white fiber attached to their seeds and the oil from these seeds. The “green” of the <span>kjv<\/span> in Esther 1:6 is undoubtedly a reference to the Levant cotton <em>(Gossypium herbaceum)<\/em> that was cultivated since time immemorial in the Far East. Alexander the Great brought it back from India. It is probable that the Jews became acquainted with cotton during the period of their Persian captivity under King Ahasuerus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cucumber\">Cucumber <em>(Cucumis chate, C. sativus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The cucumber is an annual climbing or trailing vine, the origin of which is unknown. It has been cultivated in all the warm countries of the Old World since prehistoric times. Cucumbers are usually eaten raw; a cucumber and a barley cake or some other kind of bread often constitute a meal. The reference to “a lodge in a garden of cucumbers” (Is 1:8) refers to the crudely built small house or lodge often set up in Palestinian cucumber fields and vineyards.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cummin\">Cummin <em>(Cuminum cyminum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The references in Isaiah 28:25-27 and Matthew 23:23 are clearly to the cummin—a common, annual plant of the carrot family said to be native to Egypt and the region of the eastern Mediterranean. It has long been cultivated for its powerfully aromatic and pungent seeds, which are similar to caraway seeds but larger. They do not have as agreeable a taste as caraway seeds but nevertheless were used extensively as a flavor or spice and sometimes were even mixed with flour in making bread. Cummin was also used medicinally and as a condiment with fish and meats.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cypress\">Cypress <em>(Cupressus sempervirens horizontalis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The cypress is a massive, tall-growing evergreen with scalelike leaves and is widely distributed in the mountainous regions of the Holy Land. On Mt Lebanon and Mt Hermon it grows together with the cedar and oak. Its usual height is 50 to 60 feet (15.2 to 18.3 meters), but it may grow as tall as 80 feet (24.2 meters). It is said to have been used extensively in shipbuilding by the Phoenicians, Cretans, and Greeks. There is general agreement that the “gopher wood” of Genesis 6:14 is cypress because the wood is very durable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dandelion\">Dandelion <em>(Taraxacum officinale)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Bitter Herbs (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DarnelGrass\">Darnel Grass <em>(Lolium temulentum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>It is generally agreed that the “tares” of the <span>kjv<\/span> (Mt 13:24-30) are the annual or bearded darnel grass. It is a strong grass closely resembling wheat or rye in appearance. The seeds are much smaller than those of wheat or rye, but it is extremely difficult to distinguish it from wheat or rye in its early stages. If it is not eradicated early but is left until the time of harvest, it is cut down with the wheat and the two are subsequently very difficult to separate. The seeds are poisonous, either due to some chemicals naturally present or because of a fungus that grows within the seeds.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dill\">Dill <em>(Anethum graveolens)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Dill is a weedy annual plant resembling parsley and fennel, 12 to 20 inches (30.5 to 50.8 centimeters) tall with yellow flowers. The reference in Matthew 23:23 (<span>kjv<\/span>) to anise is probably a reference to dill. This plant is widely cultivated for seeds that are aromatic and carminative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ebony\">Ebony <em>(Diospyros ebenaster, D. ebenum, D. mela<\/em><em>noxylon)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Chiefly tropical tree of southern Asia with hard, dark-colored heartwood. Ebony comes from the date plum or date tree <em>(Diospyros ebenaster<\/em> and <em>D. melanoxylon)<\/em> of India and is quite different from the date palm. It was sent by Phoenician ships across the Arabian Sea and up the Red Sea to the market in Tyre, from which it was carried overland by camel caravans. The outer wood of these trees is white and soft, but when old, the interior wood becomes hard, black, heavy, and durable and still constitutes most of the costly ebony of commerce. Ebony takes on a fine polish and is highly valued for cabinetwork, for turnery, for the manufacture of fancy ornamental articles and instruments, and as a veneer for other woods.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel mentions ivory and ebony together (Ez 27:15). Ebony was and still is frequently inlaid with ivory, with which it contrasts so strikingly in color.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Endive\">Endive <em>(Cichorium endivia)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Bitter Herbs (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FigFigTree\">Fig, Fig Tree <em>(Ficus carica)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several trees or shrubs of this genus, native to the Mediterranean region; its edible fruit. The common fig, mentioned some 60 times in the Bible, is one of the most important Bible plants. Its leaves are spoken of first in Genesis 3:7. The fig is generally regarded as native to southwestern Asia and Syria, but already in early times it was also cultivated extensively in Egypt and the Holy Land, where it was one of the principal foods. First Samuel 25:18 states that a part of the gift sent by Abigail to David consisted of 200 cakes of figs.<\/p>\n<p>The fig tree has a very peculiar type of fruit called a syconium, which is actually a very much enlarged and fleshy receptacle. It is pollinated by a wasp, without which it cannot get its fruit; this was discovered when it was first transplanted to California.<\/p>\n<p>The fig puts out its earliest fruit buds before its leaves, the former in February and the latter in April or May. When the leaves are out, the fruit ought to be ripe (Mt 21:19).<\/p>\n<p>Whenever the prophets of old berated the people for their wickedness, they often threatened that the vine and the fig crops would be destroyed. And when they held out the promise of great rewards, they said that the vine and fig crop would be restored (Jer 8:13; Hos 2:12; Jl 1:7, 12; Mi 4:4; Zec 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FirTree\">Fir Tree <em>(Abies cilicica)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>This a generic term for various evergreen trees having flat needles and erect cones. In all probability, most of the references in Scripture to the fir are references to the pine, cypress, or juniper. The only true fir in the Holy Land grows in the higher parts of Lebanon and the mountains northward. It attains a height of 30 to 75 feet (9.1 to 22.9 meters) and is widely cultivated.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Flax\">Flax <em>(Linum usitatissimum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several plants of this genus, one particularly being widely cultivated for the linseed oil from its seeds and the fine textile fibers from its stems. Flax is the oldest known of the textile fibers. Cotton is identified only once in the Bible (Est 1:6). There is no mention of any other fiber plant being cultivated in Egypt or the Holy Land in biblical days, and for that reason it is thought that linen was the material out of which clothes other than woolen ones were made. Linen was also used for domestic purposes such as towels (Jn 13:4-5), napkins (11:44), girdles and undergarments (Is 3:23; Mk 14:51), nets (Is 19:8-9), and measuring lines (Ez 40:3). The priests serving in the temple were to wear nothing but linen clothes; a mixed cloth of wool and flax together was strictly forbidden to the Jews (Lv 19:19; Dt 22:11).<\/p>\n<p>At least three kinds of linen were used in biblical times, and apparently there were particular uses for each kind. Ordinary linen of coarsest texture is mentioned in Leviticus 6:10, Ezekiel 9:2, Daniel 10:5, and Revelation 15:6. The second type of linen of superior quality is mentioned in Exodus 26:1 and 39:27. A third type of linen of finest texture and high cost is mentioned in 1 Chronicles 15:27, Esther 8:15, and Revelation 19:8.<\/p>\n<p>The common flax plant grows from one to four feet (.3 to 1.2 meters) tall with a simple, slender, wirelike stem and numerous small, pale, lancelike green leaves. The failure of the flax crop is listed as one of God’s punishments (Hos 2:9). The manufacture of linen from flax fibers was a domestic industry of Jewish women (Prv 31:13, 19), ranging from ordinary clothing to the robes and aprons worn by the priest and temple attendants. Linen was also used for wicks in lamps (Is 42:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Frankincense\">Frankincense <em>(Boswellia)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Aromatic genus resin used chiefly as incense. Frankincense is obtained from three species of a single genus of plants that grow in southern Arabia, Ethiopia, Somaliland, India, and the East Indies. The trees are large in size, related to the turpentine or terebinth tree and to those that produce balsam and myrrh. The gum has a bitter taste and gives off a strong odor in the form of a volatile oil when warmed or burned. It is obtained by successive incisions in the bark of the trunk and in the branches of living trees. It is thought that the Hebrews imported all their frankincense from Arabia, especially from the region about Sheba.<\/p>\n<p>Frankincense is mentioned 21 times in the Bible (e.g., Ex 30:34; 1 Chr 9:29; Neh 13:9; Sg 3:6; 4:6, 14; Mt 2:11; Rv 18:13) and was probably employed almost exclusively in the sacrificial services of the tabernacle and temple until the time of Solomon. It has always been the most important incense resin in the world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galbanum\">Galbanum <em>(Ferula galbaniflua)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Galbanum is a malodorous yellowish or brownish gum resin containing the chemical substance umbelliferone, obtained from several species of plants related to the fennel, native to Syria and Persia. The gum is a natural exudation of the stem or is obtained by making a transverse incision in the young stem a few inches above the ground. The milky juice soon hardens and forms one of the kinds of commercial galbanum. Its odor is strongly balsamic, pungent, and disagreeable when burned. Galbanum was one of the ingredients used to form the “holy incense” (Ex 30:34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Garlic\">Garlic <em>(Allium sativum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Onion (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GourdWild\">Gourd, Wild <em>(Citrullus colocynthis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>There has been considerable difference of opinion regarding the meaning of the words translated “wild gourds” (2 Kgs 4:39) or “gall” (Dt 29:18; 32:32; Ps 69:21; Jer 8:14; 9:15; 23:15; Lam 3:5, 19; Am 6:12; Mt 27:34; Acts 8:23). Most scholars today believe the plant referred to was the colocynth, a cucumber-like vine that trails on the ground or climbs over shrubs and fences. The fruit contains a soft spongy pulp, which is intensely bitter, strongly cathartic, and sometimes poisonous.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hedge\">Hedge <em>(Rhamnus palaestina, Balanites aegyptiaca, Lycium europaeum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Row of closely planted shrubs or low-growing trees forming a fence or boundary. A number of plants were used to provide hedges in Bible times. One of these was the Palestine buckthorn, <em>Rhamnus palaestina.<\/em> This plant is a shrub or a small tree growing from three to six feet (.9 to 1.8 meters) tall with velvety, thorny branches, evergreen leaves, and clusters of small flowers blooming in March and April. It grows in thickets and on hillsides from Syria through the Holy Land to Arabia and the Sinai. The Jericho balsam <em>(Balanites aegyptiaca)<\/em> and the European boxthorn <em>(Lycium europaeum)<\/em> are also prickly shrubs widely used as hedges in the Holy Land and may be the plants referred to in Proverbs 15:19 and Hosea 2:6.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Henna\">Henna <em>(Lawsonia inermis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Tree or shrub of Asia and northern Africa with fragrant reddish or white flowers and leaves from which a reddish dye is made. The plant referred to in Song of Songs 1:14 and 4:13 and translated as “camphire” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is thought by scholars today to refer to the henna plant. It is a native of northern India and grows wild in the Sudan, Egypt, Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, and the Holy Land. It grows from 4 to 12 feet (1.2 to 3.7 meters) tall, and its scent is similar to that of roses.<\/p>\n<p>Henna leaves are dried, crushed into a powder, mixed with water, and made into a paste that has been used since time immemorial as a cosmetic. A number of mummies have been found decorated with henna. Henna was used to provide a bright yellow, orange, or red color to the fingernails, toenails, the tips of the fingers, the palms of the hand, and the soles of the feet of young girls. Men also used it for coloring their beards and the manes and tails of horses. The dye had to be renewed once every two or three weeks. This use of henna as a cosmetic was common in Egypt at the time the children of Israel were there as slaves; they were undoubtedly familiar with it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hyacinth\">Hyacinth <em>(Hyacinthus orientalis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The lily referred to in Song of Songs 2:1-2, 16; 4:5; and 6:2-4 may well be the garden hyacinth. It is native to, and very common in, the fields and rocky places in the Holy Land, Lebanon, and northward. Its flowers in the wild form are always deep blue and very fragrant.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lily (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hyssop\">Hyssop <em>(Origanum maru)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Woody plant native to Asia with spikes of small blue flowers and aromatic leaves used as a condiment and in perfumery. There is little agreement among botanists as to the exact identity of the biblical “hyssop.” Some have suggested <em>Hyssopus offici<\/em><em>nalis,<\/em> the well-known garden herb now called hyssop. However, this plant is not native either to the Holy Land or Egypt, being found only in southern Europe. Moreover, it does not fit the requirements of the biblical plant.<\/p>\n<p>The “hyssop” of the OT is likely the Syrian or Egyptian marjoram <em>(Origanum maru).<\/em> It is referred to in Exodus 12:22; Leviticus 14:4-6, 52; Numbers 19:6, 18; 1 Kings 4:33; Psalm 51:7; and Hebrews 9:19. The marjorams are mints growing (under favorable conditions) about two or three feet (.6 to .9 meter) tall, but more often are dwarfed when growing in rock crevices and walls (cf. 1 Kgs 4:33). An aromatic substance is obtained from the crushed and dried leaves. If gathered together in a bunch with leaves and flowers, the hairy stems of the marjoram would hold liquid very well and would make an excellent sprinkler.<\/p>\n\n<p>The hyssop of the crucifixion passage in the NT (Jn 19:29) is probably the sorghum, a tall cereal plant grown primarily for food but also used for brushes and mops.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Juniper\">Juniper <em>(Juniperus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Variety of evergreen tree or shrub. The plant referred to in Jeremiah 17:6 and 48:6 and translated in the <span>kjv<\/span> “heath” is probably the savin or Phoenician juniper. The Phoenician juniper, <em>Juniperus phoenicia,<\/em> is found in the hills and rocky places of Arabia. The savin juniper, <em>J. sabina,<\/em> is common throughout the deserts, plains, and rocky places of Syria and Palestine. These references are to the brown-berried cedar, or sharp cedar.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LaurelorSweetBay\">Laurel or Sweet Bay <em>(Laurus nobilis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Shrub or tree native to the Mediterranean region. While the reference in Psalm 37:35 may be to the cedar of Lebanon, most scholars refer the “green bay tree” (<span>kjv<\/span>) of the psalmist to the sweet bay, a native of the Holy Land, inhabiting thickets and woods from the coast to the middle montane zone. It is an evergreen tree attaining a height from 40 to 60 feet (12.2 to 18.3 meters).<\/p>\n<p>Even though the tree is abundant on Mt Carmel and around Hebron, it is generally not common in the Holy Land. Its leaves are still used as a condiment, and its fruit, leaves, and bark have long been used in medicine.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leek\">Leek <em>(Allium porrum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Onion (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lentil\">Lentil <em>(Lens esculenta)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The lentil plant to which Genesis 25:29-34, 2 Samuel 17:27-29, 23:11, and Ezekiel 4:9 refer is a small, erect, annual, vetchlike plant with slender stems and tendril-bearing leaves. It produces small, white, violet-striped flowers with flat, pealike pods in which the lentils are borne.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lettuce\">Lettuce <em>(Lactuca sativa)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Bitter Herbs (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lily\">Lily <em>(Lilium)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of various plants of the genus <em>Lilium<\/em> having large, variously colored, trumpet-shaped flowers; and related plants. The lily is one of the most famous of all the plants in the Bible, but it is also one about which there has been considerable difference of opinion. It seems probable that several kinds of plants, perhaps five or six, are called lilies in the <span>kjv<\/span>. Most authorities regard the Palestine anemone or wind flower, <em>Anemone coronaria,<\/em> as the “lily of the field” (Mt 6:28, <span>kjv<\/span>) that surpassed Solomon in all his glory. These flowers are found in every part of the Holy Land in profusion; the most common forms are scarlet or yellow, but the Palestine anemone may also be blue, purple, rose, or white in color. The flower attains a diameter of two and three-quarter inches (7 centimeters).<\/p>\n<p>An alternative suggestion is the Palestinian chamomile, <em>Anthemis palaestina,<\/em> a common, white, daisylike plant. The chamomile is gathered like dry grass and thrown into the furnace when it dries up.<\/p>\n<p>Another proposed plant is <em>Lilium chalcedonicum,<\/em> the scarlet or Martagon lily. The statement in Song of Songs 5:13—“his lips like lilies”—would better fit this plant than the Palestine anemone. The reference is apparently to a rare plant of exceptional beauty. The scarlet lily is rare in the Holy Land; indeed, some botanists doubt that it lives there.<\/p>\n<p>The references in 1 Kings 7:19, 22, 26 and 2 Chronicles 4:5 are probably to the water lily, <em>Nymphaea alba,<\/em> which served as the pattern. The water lily is quite common in Europe and also in the Holy Land and northern Africa.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LotusBush\">Lotus Bush <em>(Zizyphus lotus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The “shady trees” of Job 40:21-22 (<span>kjv<\/span>; cf. <span>nlt<\/span> “lotus plants”) may refer to the lotus bush of the Middle East, <em>Zizyphus lotus,<\/em> a shrub or low tree that grows to a height of about five feet (1.5 meters) with smooth, zigzag, whitish branches.<\/p>\n<p>Other commentators believe that the shady trees of Job are large-leafed trees such as the plane tree, <em>Platanus orientalis,<\/em> or the oleander, <em>Nerium oleander.<\/em> This suggestion is based on the assumption that the animal described in Job 40 is the hippopotamus, and it seems unlikely that the hippopotamus would live under a lotus bush or even be found in places where this shrub grows. These individuals regard the plane tree or the oleander as more likely.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mallow\">Mallow <em>(Atriplex)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word used in Job 30:4 implies saltiness, and for this reason botanists believe that it refers to one of the species of the saltwort or orach. Twenty-one species of saltwort occur in the Holy Land, almost all of which are common and could well meet the requirements of the text. <em>Atriplex halimus<\/em> is the species usually suggested, a strong-growing bushy shrub related to the spinach.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mandrake\">Mandrake <em>(Mandragora officinarum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The mandrake or love apple is a stemless herbaceous perennial related to the nightshade, potato, and tomato. It has a large, beetlike, often forked taproot from the top of which arise many dark leaves about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long and four inches (10.2 centimeters) wide. The plant is slightly poisonous, and the thick taproots have some resemblance in shape to the lower parts of the human body. For this reason certain aphrodisiac properties were ascribed to it (cf. Gn 30:14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The love apple was a common plant in deserted fields throughout the Holy Land. It is native to the entire Mediterranean region, southern Europe, and Asia Minor. The mandrake is mentioned in Song of Songs 7:13, though some scholars believe the writer may actually have been referring to the citron or to the common edible field mushroom, <em>Agaricus campestris.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Melon\">Melon <em>(Cucumis melo, Citrullus vulgaris)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several varieties of these two related vines having a hard rind and juicy flesh. The melons of Numbers 11:5 may be either the muskmelon <em>(Cucumis melo)<\/em> or the watermelon <em>(Citrullus vulgaris).<\/em> It may be that both fruits are referred to.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Millet\">Millet <em>(Panicum miliaceum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>A grass grown in Eurasia for its edible seed. Millet seeds are the smallest of all the grass seeds cultivated as food but are produced profusely. Millet is an annual grass seldom more that two feet (.6 meter) tall. The small seeds of the millet are used on cakes and eaten uncooked by the poor of the land.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mint\">Mint <em>(Mentha)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of various plants of this family with aromatic foliage that is processed for flavoring. Quite a few mints are common in the Holy Land, but the horse mint <em>(Mentha longifolia)<\/em> is probably the one referred to in Matthew 23:23 and Luke 11:42. Mints were employed by the ancient Hebrews, Greeks, and Romans for flavoring, as a carminative in medicine, and as a condiment in cooking.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mulberry\">Mulberry <em>(Morus nigra)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any tree of this family, some bearing dark-purple fruit and one bearing white fruit, having leaves used as food for silkworms. The sycamine tree of Luke 17:6 (<span>kjv<\/span>) is evidently the black mulberry, <em>Morus nigra.<\/em> It is a low-growing, thick-crowned, stiff-branched tree standing from 24 to 35 feet (7.3 to 10.7 meters) tall, though rarely more than 30 feet (9.1 meters) tall. Originally native to northern Persia, it is now cultivated throughout the Middle East for its fruit. The Chinese or Indian species, <em>M. alba,<\/em> was until recently widely cultivated in Syria and the Holy Land but is not indigenous.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mustard\">Mustard <em>(Brassica nigra, B. arvensis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Various plants of this genus are native to Eurasia, some of which are cultivated for their edible seeds. While there is disagreement about the identity of the “mustard” of Matthew 13:31-32, 17:20, Mark 4:31, Luke 13:19, and 17:6, it is generally thought to be the ordinary black mustard, <em>Brassica nigra.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The mustard Jesus referred to may be the charlock or wild mustard, <em>B. arvensis,<\/em> which normally grows from one to three feet (.3 to .9 meter) tall. Some have suggested that it was actually <em>Salvadora persica,<\/em> found in thickets around the Dead Sea. The plant has a pleasant aromatic taste resembling that of mustard, and if taken in considerable quantity, it will produce an irritation of the nose and eyes similar to that of mustard. However, this plant does not grow as far north as Galilee, and the fruits are rather large and stony, thus hardly fitting the description of the parable.<\/p>\n<p>While the seeds of the mustard are not the smallest known, they were probably the smallest familiar to the common people who comprised Jesus’ audience in Galilee.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Myrrh\">Myrrh <em>(Commiphora myrrha, C. kataf)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Shrub or tree exuding an aromatic gum resin used in perfume and incense. Most of the references in Scripture to myrrh are to <em>Commiphora myrrha,<\/em> although <em>C. kataf<\/em> may also be involved since it grows in the same region and is similar. The two trees are native to Arabia, Ethiopia, and the Somali coast of east Africa. They yield a gummy exudation that constitutes most of the myrrh of commerce. Both species are low, scrubby, thick- and stiff-branched thorny shrubs or small trees that grow in rocky places, especially on limestone hills. In the East it is highly regarded as an aromatic substance, perfume, and medicine. The ancient Egyptians burned it in their temples and embalmed their dead with it; the Jews also used it for embalming (Jn 19:39). The Hebrews held it in high regard as a perfume (Ps 45:8).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Myrtle\">Myrtle <em>(Myrtus communis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The myrtle tree is common in the Holy Land, especially around Bethlehem, Lebanon, Hebron, and the slopes of Mt Carmel and Mt Tabor. It is native to western Asia and in good environments grows into a small evergreen tree 20 to 30 feet (6.2 to 9.1 meters) tall. More often, however, it is a straggling bush 1½ to 4 feet (.5 to 1.2 meters) tall.<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, myrtle is referred to chiefly as a symbol of God’s generosity. Branches of myrtle trees were included among those that Nehemiah ordered to be gathered for the Feast of Tabernacles (Neh 8:15). The myrtle was symbolic not only of peace but also of justice.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Narcissus\">Narcissus <em>(Narcissus tazetta)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Widely cultivated plant of this family with narrow leaves and usually white or yellow flowers with a cup-crown or trumpet-shaped crown. The polyanthus narcissus <em>(Narcissus tazetta)<\/em> appears to be the plant referred to in Isaiah 35:1. This narcissus grows abundantly on the plains of Sharon and elsewhere in Palestine. Being sweet-smelling, it is a great favorite.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Nard\">Nard <em>(Nardostachys jatamansi)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The nard is a perennial herb with strong, pleasantly scented roots. It is native to high altitudes in the Himalayas, and its range extends from there into western Asia. The roots and spikelike wooly young stems are dried before the leaves unfold and are used for making perfume. It is still used in India as a perfume for the hair, and there is every reason to believe that the spikenard of Scripture (Sg 1:12; 4:13-14; Mk 14:3; Jn 12:3) came originally from India.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Nettle\">Nettle <em>(Urtica)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Plant of this genus having toothed leaves covered with hairs that exude a stinging flush. Four species of nettle are found in the Holy Land: the common or great nettle, <em>Urtica dioica;<\/em> the Roman nettle, <em>U. pilulifera;<\/em> the small nettle, <em>U. urens;<\/em> and <em>U. caudata,<\/em> which is similar to the small nettle. Some nettles attain a height of five to six feet (1.5 to 1.8 meters). They are common pests of waste places and fields. They are often seen occupying ground that was once cultivated but has since been neglected (Is 34:13; Hos 9:6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NutmegFlower\">Nutmeg Flower <em>(Nigella sativa)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The “fitches” of Isaiah 28:25-27 (<span>kjv<\/span>) are probably the nutmeg flower, an annual plant of the buttercup family. The plant grows wild in southern Europe, Syria, Egypt, north Africa, and other Mediterranean lands, where it is extensively cultivated for its strongly pungent, pepperlike aromatic seeds. These are sprinkled over some kinds of bread and cakes in the East and are used for flavoring curries and other dishes in the Holy Land and Egypt. Cummin and nutmeg flowers are still gathered in the Holy Land in the same way described by Isaiah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Oak\">Oak <em>(Quercus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>At least five species of oaks are found in Palestine. One of these is the kermes oak <em>(Quercus coccifera),<\/em> the host of the insect <em>Coccus ilicis,<\/em> which produces the scarlet dye used in coloring linen and wool (Gn 38:28-30; Ex 25:4; 26:1; 28:33; 35:23; 39:24; Lv 14:4-6, 51-52; Nm 19:6; 2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14; Is 1:18; Heb 9:19; Rv 18:12). The kermes oak grows from 6 to 35 feet (1.8 to 10.7 meters) tall and is found in the mountainous regions of Syria, Lebanon, and the Holy Land. When it grows alone, the kermes oak often becomes a large tree. It was regularly planted by tombs in the East. The oak was always respected and even venerated in biblical times for its large size and strength, and great men were usually buried in its shade. Abraham’s oak in Hebron is an example.<\/p>\n<p>A second oak is the valonia oak <em>(Q. aegilops),<\/em> perhaps the oak of Isaiah 2:13 and 44:14. It is common in the middle montane zones and probably was abundant in the area around Bashan. The oak of Genesis 35:4, 8 is thought to have been the holm oak <em>(Q. ilex),<\/em> an evergreen oak that grows to a height of 60 feet (18.3 meters). Still another oak is <em>Q. lusitanica,<\/em> the cypress oak, a small deciduous tree seldom more than 20 feet (6.1 meters) tall. The very large acorns of this tree were sometimes eaten.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “plain” (<span>kjv<\/span>) in Genesis 12:6, 13:18, 14:13, and 18:1 should probably be translated “oak.”<\/p>\n<p>The many references to “groves” in the OT, usually in connection with the worship of Baal or other heathen gods (Ex 34:13; Dt 16:21; Jgs 3:7; 1 Kgs 14:23; 18:19; 2 Kgs 17:16—all <span>kjv<\/span>), were probably groves of sacred oak trees.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OilTreeOleaster\">Oil Tree, Oleaster <em>(Elaeagnus angustifolia)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Small Eurasian tree with oblong silvery leaves, greenish flowers, and olivelike fruit. There is question as to which tree is referred to when 1 Kings 6:23, 31-33 and 1 Chronicles 27:28 refer to “olive trees.” The same word occurs in Isaiah 41:19 and Micah 6:7. The plant referred to is probably the narrow-leaved oleaster <em>(Elaeagnus angustifolia),<\/em> a small stiff-branched tree or graceful shrub growing from 15 to 20 feet (4.6 to 6.1 meters) tall, common in all parts of the Holy Land except in the Jordan Valley. At one time it was particularly common on Mt Tabor and at Hebron and Samaria. The wood is hard and fine-grained and therefore well suited for carving of images and figures. The oil that it yields is a rather inferior type used in medication but not for food; this may be the oil of Micah 6:7.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Oleander\">Oleander <em>(Nerium oleander)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any poisonous evergreen shrub of this genus growing in warm climates. One of the suggestions for the plants identified as “roses” in various translations (Ecclus 24:14, <span>kjv<\/span>) is the oleander. This plant, originally native to the East Indies, has been cultivated throughout the warm regions of the world for centuries. It flourishes in the Holy Land today and forms dense thickets in some parts of the Jordan Valley. It is usually a shrub from 3 to 12 feet (.9 to 3.7 meters) tall. Every part of the plant is dangerously poisonous.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OliveOliveTree\">Olive, Olive Tree <em>(Olea europaea)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Old world semitropical evergreen tree bearing edible fruit. The olive, <em>Olea europaea,<\/em> was unquestionably one of the most valuable trees known to the Jews. There are innumerable references to it in Scripture, as well as to olive oil, which was used for anointing. The tree is quite common in the Holy Land, and in many places it is the only tree of any substantial size. The branches of the wild olive are rather stiff and spinescent, and the typical cultivated tree is a multi-branched evergreen, 20 or more feet (6.1 meters) tall, with a gnarled trunk and smooth, ash-colored bark. The leaves are leathery and the flowers are small, yellow or white. The fruits are large, black or violet, ripening in September, and it is the outer fleshy parts of the fruit that yield the valuable olive oil of commerce. Thirty-one percent of the ripe fruit is oil. The ripe fruit is eaten raw, as is the green, unripe fruit. The wood of the trunk and limbs is hard, rich yellow or amber in color, and fine-grained, often handsomely variegated. It is still used today for the finest cabinetwork and turnery. The tree grows very slowly, but it attains a great age. It is difficult to kill the olive tree by cutting it down, because new sprouts are sent up from the root and all around the margins of the old stump, often forming a grove of two to five trunks, all from a single root that originally supported only one tree.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Onion\">Onion <em>(Allium)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The onions referred to in Numbers 11:5 are undoubtedly <em>Allium cepa,<\/em> the Egyptian onion, which is made up of a compact coated bulb formed of layers consisting of broad fleshy bases of closely overlapping leaves. The leaves are slender and hollow. The entire plant has a characteristic pungent taste and odor.<\/p>\n\n<p>Closely related to the onion is the garlic, <em>A. sativum.<\/em> The common garlic is a hardy, bulbous perennial plant that is cultivated in Europe, western Asia, and Egypt. The leaves are narrow, flat, and ribbonlike. It is extremely popular with people of the Mediterranean region.<\/p>\n<p>Still another one of the onions is the leek, <em>A. porrum.<\/em> The bulb of the leek differs from that of the onion and garlic in that it is slender, cylindrical, and more than six inches (15.2 centimeters) in length. The flavor resembles that of the onion but is more pungent. The leaves are eaten as a relish or are cooked in soups. The bulbs are cut into small pieces and employed as seasoning for meat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Palm\">Palm <em>(Phoenix dactylifera)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The palm tree of the Bible is undoubtedly the date palm. At one time it was as characteristic of the Holy Land as it is still today of Egypt. It is characterized by a branchless, tapering stem of up to 80 feet (24.2 meters) or more in height and a large terminal cluster of feathery leaves, each six to nine feet (1.8 to 2.7 meters) or more long. Because of its height and unusual structure, it was natural that it should be used as a form of ornamentation in Eastern architecture. The stem and leaves were favorite subjects of architectural embellishment. The immense, branchlike leaves that are referred to as branches in the Bible were symbols of triumph and were used on occasions of great rejoicing (Jn 12:13; Rv 7:9). The large leaves are still used to cover the roofs and sides of houses and to give solidity to reed fences. Mats, baskets, and even dishes are made of them. Small leaves are used as dusters, and the wood of the trunk is used for timber. Rope is made from the weblike integument in the crown. The fruit, borne in an immense drooping cluster, which may weigh from 30 to 50 pounds (13.6 to 22.7 kilograms), is the chief food of many natives of Arabia and north Africa. A single tree may yield up to 200 pounds (90.7 kilograms) of dates a year. They may be dried for future use.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Papyrus\">Papyrus <em>(Cyperus papyrus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Egyptian bulrush or papyrus (Ex 2:3-5; Jb 8:11; Is 18:2; 19:6-7; 35:7; 58:5) has smooth three-sided stems ordinarily attaining a height of 8 to 10 feet (2.4 to 3 meters), but sometimes even 16 feet (4.9 meters), and a thickness of two to three inches (5.1 to 7.6 centimeters) at the base with a large tuft of florets at the end. The papyrus formerly grew in great abundance along the banks of the Nile, forming what was almost a dense jungle. Today it is practically extinct in lower Egypt, although it is still found along the White Nile and in the Sudan. The papyrus still grows in parts of the Holy Land, especially around the north end of the plain of Galilee and the Huleh swamps.<\/p>\n\n<p>In addition to being used for making small vessels to float in water (Ex 2:3), for mats, and for various other domestic purposes, it is best known as the source of ancient paper. In manufacturing paper from papyrus, the stems of the plant were first peeled and the pitch then cut longitudinally into thin slices that were laid side by side. These were then sprinkled with water and pressed to unite the whole into one piece. The sheet was then dried and cut into pieces of the required size. In the better grades of papyrus paper, several layers of stem slices were laid crosswise on each other.<\/p>\n<p>The pale, fawn-colored, tassel-like inflorescences at the summit of the stems were used to adorn Egyptian temples and to crown the statues of gods. They were also worn as crowns by famous men and national heroes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PineTree\">Pine Tree <em>(Pinus brutia, P. halepensis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Various evergreen trees of this family with needle-shaped leaves in clusters and seed-bearing cones. While there is considerable confusion concerning the conifers of the Bible, it seems apparent that pines are referred to in such passages as Leviticus 23:40; Nehemiah 8:15; Isaiah 41:19; and 60:13. One of the Holy Land’s pines is the Brutian pine <em>(Pinus brutia),<\/em> a mountain-inhabiting species of the northern regions of Palestine. It attains a height of 10 to 35 feet (3 to 10.7 meters) with a rather diffuse growth and branches in whorls.<\/p>\n<p>Another of the pines is the Aleppo pine, <em>Pinus halepensis.<\/em> Most of the instances of the occurrence of “fir” or “fir tree” in the <span>kjv<\/span> probably refer to the Aleppo pine (2 Sm 6:5; 1 Kgs 5:8, 10; 6:34; 2 Kgs 19:23; 2 Chr 2:8; Ps 104:17; Sg 1:17; Is 14:8; 37:24; 55:13; 60:13; Ez 27:5; 31:8; Hos 14:8; Na 2:3; Zec 11:2). It grows from 9 to 60 feet (2.7 to 18.3 meters) tall with diffuse ascending branches and yellowish or brownish branchlets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Pistachio\">Pistachio <em>(Pistacia terebinthus, P. vera)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Palestine terebinth or turpentine tree is a large deciduous tree with straggling boughs. In the winter, without its leaves, it looks much like the oak. It grows from 12 to 25 feet (3.7 to 7.6 meters) tall. Every part of the tree contains a fragrant, resinous juice. It is common on the lower slopes of the hills throughout Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Arabia, generally growing as a solitary tree and found mostly in localities too warm or too dry for the oak that it generally replaces. Since it is native to Gilead, it is quite probable that its resinous juice formed part of the spicery that the Israelites carried to Egypt from Gilead (Gn 37:25).<\/p>\n<p>The nuts of Genesis 43:11 are apparently pistachio nuts from the pistachio tree, <em>Pistacia vera,<\/em> closely related to the terebinth. It attains a height of 10 to 30 feet (3 to 9.1 meters) with a spreading top. It is found wild in many rocky parts of Lebanon and the Holy Land. The nut has a light-colored shell and the kernel has a sweet delicate flavor much relished wherever it grows.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PlaneTree\">Plane Tree <em>(Platanus orientalis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several trees of this family with bell-shaped fruit clusters and usually an outer bark that flakes off in patches or strips. The references in Genesis 30:37 and Ezekiel 31:8 are apparently not to the chestnut tree, which is not indigenous to Palestine, but to the oriental plane tree, <em>Platanus orientalis.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The plane tree is a massive tree 60 feet (18.3 meters) or more tall with a trunk often of vast circumference, sometimes as much as 40 feet (12.2 meters). The outer bark peels off in sheets or scales, thus exposing a smooth whitish or yellowish inner bark. The tree is common throughout Lebanon, Syria, and the Holy Land, growing even in subalpine regions. However, it is primarily a tree of the plains and lowlands, growing on the edges of streams and lakes and in marshy places.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Pomegranate\">Pomegranate <em>(Punica granatum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The pomegranate is usually a small, bushlike tree but may occasionally become a large, branching shrub or small tree reaching a height of 20 to 30 feet (6.1 to 9.1 meters). The branches are often thorny. The showy bell-like flowers are usually scarlet, though sometimes yellow or white. The globular fruit is as large as an orange or medium-size apple. It has a hard rind of a bright red or yellowish color when ripe and is surmounted by the dry sepals that resemble a crown. The fruit itself is a crimson juicy pulp in which many red seeds are imbedded. The flowers of the pomegranate undoubtedly served as a pattern for the golden bells referred to in Exodus 28:33-34 and 39:24-26, and the open flowers of 1 Kings 6:32. The erect calyx lobes on the fruit served as a model for crowns of kings.<\/p>\n<p>The pomegranate is native to Asia, but it has been cultivated since prehistoric times and is now quite common in the Holy Land, in Egypt, and along the shores of the Mediterranean. It is listed as one of the pleasant fruits of Egypt (Nm 20:5) and one of the promised blessings of the Holy Land (Dt 8:8).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Poplar\">Poplar <em>(Populus euphratica, P. alba)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Fast-growing deciduous tree of the same genus as the aspen and cottonwood. The <span>kjv<\/span> references in 2 Samuel 5:23-24 and 1 Chronicles 14:14-15 to mulberry trees are more probably to the Euphrates poplar or aspen, <em>Populus euphratica.<\/em> This tree grows to a height of 30 to 45 feet (9.1 to 13.7 meters) with spreading branches. The Euphrates aspen is found only on rivers and stream banks throughout the area from Syria through the Holy Land to Stony Arabia. It is especially common in the Jordan Valley.<\/p>\n<p>The white poplar <em>(Populus alba)<\/em> is common in wet places in Syria, Lebanon, the Holy Land, and Sinai. It attains a height of 30 to 60 feet (9.1 to 18.3 meters) with spreading branches. Some suggest that the altars of various pagan religions were usually erected on the top of a hill and in the shade of a poplar grove.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Quince\">Quince <em>(Cydonia oblonga)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Tree native to western Asia, having white flowers and applelike fruit that is edible when cooked. Some believe that the “apples” of the OT were quinces, <em>Cydonia oblonga.<\/em> The quince tree is quite common in the Holy Land, though chiefly as a cultivated tree. It may occur wild in the northern parts of Syria. It is native to northern Persia and Asia Minor. The fruit is yellowish and highly fragrant, and it is the fragrance that caused it to be held in high regard by the ancients.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Reed\">Reed <em>(Juncus, Scirpus, Typha angustata, Arundo donax)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Numerous species of the rush and bulrush grow in the Holy Land. There are at least 21 varieties of rushes. The common soft rush or bog rush <em>(Juncus effusus)<\/em> is found in wet places, even in the Sinai and other deserts. The sea or hard rush <em>(J. maritimus)<\/em> is found in damp places throughout the Holy Land and even in Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>At least 15 kinds of bulrushes <em>(Scirpus)<\/em> are known in the Holy Land. The cluster-headed club rush <em>(Scirpus holoschoenus)<\/em> is common in damp places throughout the Holy Land to the Sinai. The lake club rush or tall bulrush <em>(S. lacustris)<\/em> is found in swamps and ditches throughout northern Africa to the Dead Sea. The sea club rush or salt marsh club rush <em>(S. maritimus)<\/em> is found in ditches and swamps in many places of the Holy Land. Any of these species may be the one referred to in Job 8:11; Isaiah 9:14; 19:6, 15.<\/p>\n<p>The reference in Genesis 41:2 to the feeding of cattle in the meadow seems to be to the tall reed <em>(Arundo donax),<\/em> which grows 18 feet (5.5 meters) or more in height. This plant is also known as the Persian reed and is common throughout the Holy Land, Syria, and the Sinai peninsula. It is a gigantic grass that may have a stem diameter of two or three inches (5.1 to 7.6 centimeters) at the base and is terminated by a plume of white flowers similar to those of the sugarcane or pampas grass. The plant was used for many purposes by the ancients: for walking sticks, fishing rods, measuring rods, and musical pipes. It is, therefore, quite possible that the “reed” of Matthew 27:48 and Mark 15:36 was a carpenter’s reed or measuring rod.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Papyrus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Rue\">Rue <em>(Ruta chalepensis, R. graveolens)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Aromatic Eurasian plant with evergreen leaves that yield an acrid, volatile oil once used in medicine. There is little question as to the correctness of the translation of “rue” in Luke 11:42, but there is some doubt as to the exact species. Most writers think that it was the common rue <em>(Rue graveolens),<\/em> a perennial shrubby plant with erect stems two to three feet (.6 to .9 meter) tall and deeply cut leaves. A very strong odor emanates from the foliage. This species is native to the Mediterranean region and grows wild in the Holy Land, especially on Mt Tabor.<\/p>\n<p>Rue was highly thought of by the ancients as a medicinal, supposed to prevent dizziness, dumbness, epilepsy, eye inflammations, insanity, and the “evil eye.” Rue was also used for seasoning dishes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Rush\">Rush <em>(Butomus umbellatus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Generic term for any of various grasslike marsh plants having pliant, hollow, or pithy stems. There is considerable uncertainty about the identification of the plant referred to in Genesis 41:2 translated in the <span>kjv<\/span> as “meadow,” and in Job 8:11 as “flag.” Since it is mentioned along with the papyrus in the Job passage, it seems that it refers to a specific kind of plant rather than to an aggregate of plants in a meadow. From the description in Genesis as being a plant on which Pharaoh’s cattle might feed along the banks of the Nile and yet not the papyrus, it may refer to the flowering rush or water gladiola <em>(Butomus umbellatus),<\/em> which flourishes both in Egypt and in the Holy Land, along with the papyrus.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Reed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Saffron\">Saffron <em>(Crocus sativus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Saffron, referred to in Song of Songs 4:14, is the product of several species of <em>Crocus,<\/em> especially of the blue-flowered saffron crocus <em>(C. sativus),<\/em> which is native to Greece and Asia Minor. The commercial product consists of the stigma and upper portions of the style, the top parts of the flower ovary, which are collected shortly after the flower opens. It requires at least 4,000 stigmas to make an ounce of saffron. After being gathered, the stigmas are dried in the sun, pounded, and made into small cakes. Saffron is used principally as a yellow dye and also as a fruit coloring for curries and stews.<\/p>\n<p>Another, entirely different kind of dye-producing plant <em>(Carthamus tinctorius)<\/em> called carthamine, bastard saffron, or safflower is a member of the thistle family. Its red florets yield a dye used extensively for coloring silk, in cooking, and for adulterating genuine saffron. It is an annual spiny plant three to four and a half feet (1.4 meters) tall, native to Syria and Egypt. In Egypt the grave clothes of mummies were dyed with this material, and it is quite possible that this plant may also have been the saffron of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sage\">Sage <em>(Salvia judaica)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Judean sage grows to three feet (.9 meter) tall in the mountains and hills of Palestine. Its stems are four-angled, stiff, and rough. The plant grows from Syria south through Nazareth, Hebron, Tiberius, Samaria, and Judea.<\/p>\n<p>This plant is the origin of the design of the seven-branched lampstand of Exodus 37:17-18, which is known as the menorah, the traditional Jewish symbol. The inflorescence of the plant, when pressed flat, has almost exactly the same shape and form as the seven-branched candlestick, with its central spike and three pairs of side branches each bending upward and inward in a symmetrical fashion. On each branch of the plant’s inflorescence are whorls or buds that perhaps give the idea for the “knops” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “knobs” on the biblical golden candlesticks.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Spelt\">Spelt <em>(Triticum aestivum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Hardy member of the wheat family. The rye of Exodus 9:32 and Isaiah 28:25, as well as the fitches of Ezekiel 4:9 (all <span>kjv<\/span>) are thought to be spelt. It is a hard-grained species of wheat with loose ears and grains triangular in cross-section, and was the most common form of wheat in early times. It has a stouter stem than wheat and strong spikes of grain. Bread made of its flour is much inferior to that made from wheat, but spelt will thrive in almost any kind of soil and will yield a crop on land that is unfit for wheat. The ancients preferred it to barley for bread.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"StoraxTree\">Storax Tree <em>(Styrax officinalis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Various trees of this genus yielding an aromatic resin. Today it is thought that the stacte of Exodus 30:34 was derived from the storax tree. It is an irregularly stiff-branched shrub or small tree 9 to 20 feet (2.7 to 6.1 meters) tall. This tree is abundant on low hills and rocky places from Lebanon through the Holy Land. Its gum is obtained by making incisions in the stems and branches. It is highly perfumed and is still prized today as a perfume.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sycamore\">Sycamore-fig <em>(Ficus sycomorus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Tree of northeastern Africa and adjacent Asia, related to the fig. The word translated “sycamore” in 1 Kings 10:27; 1 Chronicles 27:28; 2 Chronicles 1:15; 9:27; Psalm 78:47; Isaiah 9:10; Amos 7:14; and Luke 19:4 undoubtedly refers to the well-known sycamore-fig, which is also known as the mulberry-fig or fig-mulberry. It should not be confused with the common sycamore of the North American continent, which is actually a plane tree. The sycamore-fig of the Bible is a strong-growing, robust, wide-spreading tree growing 30 to 40 feet (9.1 to 12.2 meters) tall and sometimes attaining a trunk circumference of 20 feet (6.1 meters) or more with a crown 120 feet (36.6 meters) in diameter. It is a tree that is easily climbed and is frequently planted along roadsides, which accounts for the reference in Luke 19:4. It produces an abundant amount of fruit in clusters on all parts of the tree, on both young and old branches and even on the trunk itself. It is very similar to the common fig, only smaller and much inferior in quality. In David’s day it was so valuable that he appointed a special overseer for the sycamore trees (1 Chr 27:28). It is thought that Amos was not a gatherer of sycamore fruit but rather a dresser of sycamore trees.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Tamarisk\">Tamarisk <em>(Tamarix)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The references in Genesis 21:33 and 1 Samuel 22:6 and 31:13 seem to be to the tamarisk. These trees or shrubs are small and fast-growing with a durable wood. They are abundant in deserts, dunes, and salt marshes. <em>Tamarix aphylla<\/em> is leafless and has small white flowers. These trees or shrubs often provide a soothing touch of green foliage and a promise of cooling shade to the traveler. Tamarisks are able to survive because they either have small, scalelike leaves, which lose little moisture by transpiration, or no leaves at all. The larger of the tamarisks are valued for their wood in a region where wood is scarce. The wood was used for building and also as a source of an excellent type of charcoal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Terebinth\">Terebinth <em>(Pistacia terebinthus)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Pistachio (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThistleThorn\">Thistle, Thorn <em>(Lycium europaeum, Solanum incanum, Centaurea, Silybum marianum, Ruscus aculeatus, Agrostemma githago, Paliurus spina-christi, Zizyphus spina-christi)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>There are 22 different Hebrew and Greek words used in Scripture to refer to spiny or prickly shrubs or weeds, and these are translated as “bramble,” “brier,” “cockle,” “thorn,” and “thistle.” At present, there are about 125 species of thorns and thistles that grow in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The bramble in the allegory of Judges 9:14-15 is believed to refer to the European boxthorn or desert-thorn, <em>Lycium europaeum.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The general consensus is that the “briers” of Isaiah 10:17, 55:13, Micah 7:4, and Hebrews 6:8 are the Palestine nightshade <em>(Solanum incanum),<\/em> or “Jericho potato.”<\/p>\n<p>The thistles of Genesis 3:17-18, 2 Kings 14:9, 2 Chronicles 25:18, Hosea 10:8, and Matthew 7:16, as well as the thorns of Matthew 13:7 and Hebrews 6:8, are thought to be one of the species of the thistle, <em>Centaurea.<\/em> Among the more common thistles in the Holy Land are the true star-thistle <em>(Centaurea calcitrapa),<\/em> the dwarf centaury <em>(C. verutum),<\/em> the Iberian centaury <em>(C. iberica),<\/em> and the lady’s thistle <em>(Silybum marianum).<\/em> Some thistles attain a height of five to six feet (.9 to 1.8 meters). Thistles are characteristic of an area that is uncultivated and neglected. Many have beautiful flowers, but all are covered with sharp spines.<\/p>\n<p>The references in Ezekiel 2:6 to “briers” and Ezekiel 28:24 to a “pricking brier” may be to the prickly butchers-broom or knee-holly, <em>Ruscus aculeatus.<\/em> The plant is common in rocky woods in the northern regions of the Holy Land, especially around Mt Tabor and Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>The cockle of Job 31:40 (<span>nlt<\/span> “weeds”) perhaps refers to the corn cockle, <em>Agrostemma githago.<\/em> This plant is common in grainfields throughout the Holy Land. It is a strong-growing and troublesome weed in grainfields, growing from one to three feet (.3 to .9 meter) tall.<\/p>\n<p>Many commentators think that the “thorns” out of which the crown of thorns (Mt 27:29; Jn 19:2) was made were from the Christ-thorn <em>(Paliurus spina-christi).<\/em> This belief has led to its specific name; the Christ-thorn is a spiny plant that ordinarily grows as a straggling shrub three to nine feet (.9 to 2.7 meters) tall. The flexible branches are armed at the base of each leaf with a pair of unequal, stiff, sharp spines. The unusual pliable texture of the young branches renders it particularly easy to plait into a crownlike wreath.<\/p>\n<p>The thorns of Judges 8:7, Isaiah 7:19, 9:18, 55:13, and Matthew 7:16 may refer to the Syrian Christ-thorn <em>(Zizyphus spina-christi),<\/em> a shrub or small tree 9 to 15 feet (2.7 to 4.6 meters) tall, sometimes growing into a 40-foot (12.2-meter) tree with smooth white branches bearing a pair of stout, unequal, recurved spines at the back of each leaf.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bramble; Buckthorn (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Tulip\">Tulip <em>(Tulipa montana, T. sharonensis)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several bulbous plants of this family native to Asia. The rose of Sharon in Song of Songs 2:1 may be the mountain tulip, <em>Tulipa montana,<\/em> or the closely related Sharon tulip, <em>T. sharonensis.<\/em> The former is an attractive plant that grows from a bulb and has leaves that are often wavy-margined. The species is common in the mountainous regions of Syria, Lebanon, and the Anti-Lebanon. It is primarily a mountainous species. The Sharon tulip <em>(T. sharonensis)<\/em> is found in sandy places on the Sharon coastal plains.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Tumbleweed\">Tumbleweed <em>(Gundelia tournefortii, Anastatica hierochuntica)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The references in Psalm 83:13 to “whirling dust” and in Isaiah 17:13 to “wheel” or “rolling thing” (<span>niv<\/span> “tumbleweed”) seem to be to the Palestinian tumbleweed <em>(Gundelia tournefortii),<\/em> a member of the thistle family. It is a prickly herb with milky juice. It rolls over the land and gathers in tremendous heaps in hollows.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Vegetable\">Vegetable<\/p>\n<p>Scriptural references to vegetables are probably, in most cases, to the dried leguminous seeds of beans and lentils.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Vine\">Vine <em>(Vitis vinifera)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any plant with a flexible stem that climbs, twines, or creeps along a surface or support. The common grapevine <em>(Vitis vinifera)<\/em> is mentioned throughout the Bible. The fruitful vine (Ez 17:5-10) and the vine brought out of Egypt (Ps 80:8) were symbolic of the Jewish people. Jesus compares himself to the true vine, of which his disciples were the branches (Jn 15:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The grapevine of the Old World sometimes assumes the characteristics of a tree, with stems up to a foot and a half (45.7 centimeters) in diameter, the branches then being trained on a trellis and bearing bunches of grapes 10 to 12 pounds (4.5 to 5.4 kilograms) in weight, with the individual grapes the size of small plums. Bunches have been produced weighing as much as 26 pounds (11.8 kilograms). The vines of the Holy Land were always renowned both for the luxuriance of their growth and for the immense clusters of grapes they produced. Thus it does not seem improbable that the spies sent to the Promised Land should have employed a pole to transport some of the clusters home (Nm 13:23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The wild grape <em>(Vitis orientalis)<\/em> is referred to in Isaiah 5:2-4, Jeremiah 2:21, and Ezekiel 15:2-6. It is known as the native wild fox grape and has small, black, acidic berries about the size of currants with little juice.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Walnut\">Walnut <em>(Juglans regia)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of several trees of this genus having round, sticky fruit enclosing an edible nut. The reference in Song of Songs 6:11 to “nuts” is thought to refer to the Persian or common walnut, <em>Juglans regia.<\/em> The tree is believed to have been indigenous to northern Persia, but it is actually found wild in many parts of northern India, eastward as far as China, and westward through Persia. At the time of Solomon, it was widely cultivated for its fruit throughout the East. Perhaps Solomon’s garden of nuts was a part of his extensive gardens at Etham, six miles (9.7 kilometers) from Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WaterLily\">Water Lily <em>(Nymphaea)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Any of numerous aquatic plants of this genus with floating leaves and showy flowers. The carved lily ornamentation of 1 Kings 7:19-26 and 2 Chronicles 4:5 was probably patterned after the flowers of the water lily. Few flowers can equal the Egyptian lotus or water lily <em>(Nymphaea lotus)<\/em> in beauty. It looks very much like a large white rose and at one time floated in profusion on the waters of the Nile.<\/p>\n<p>The common European white water lily <em>(N. alba)<\/em> was also familiar to the children of Israel. It grows not only in Europe but also in the Holy Land and North Africa. It is, however, not as common in Egypt as is the white lotus.<\/p>\n<p>Another water lily with which the Israelites were probably familiar is the blue lotus, <em>N. caerulea.<\/em> Its leaves are 12 to 16 inches (30.5 to 40.6 centimeters) across and it has light-blue flowers that are three to six inches (7.6 to 15.2 centimeters) in diameter.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wheat\">Wheat <em>(Triticum aestivum, T. compositum)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Various cereal grasses of this family widely cultivated for its edible grain. Five kinds of wheat are native to—and still wild in—the Holy Land, and at least eight others are cultivated there today; probably most, if not all, were known in Bible times. The wild varieties were probably more abundant then than they are today. Among these are the einkorn <em>(T. monococcum),<\/em> the thaoudar <em>(T. thaoudar),<\/em> and the wild emmer <em>(T. dicoccoides).<\/em> The composite wheat <em>(T. compositum),<\/em> with its branched spikes, often bearing as many as seven heads per stalk, is definitely referred to in Genesis 41:5-57. It is depicted on numerous Egyptian monuments and on inscriptions and is still commonly seen in the Nile Delta, where it is known as “mummy wheat.” It is also cultivated in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The most frequently mentioned wheat of the Bible is undoubtedly the commonly cultivated summer and winter wheat, <em>Triticum aestivum.<\/em> It is an abundant annual grass cultivated in Egypt and other Eastern lands since earliest times. The exact place of its origin is unknown. Grains of wheat have been found in the most ancient Egyptian tombs and in the remains of prehistoric lake dwellings in Switzerland. It was certainly the chief grain of Mesopotamia in Jacob’s time (Gn 30:14).<\/p>\n<p>Corn in biblical days often included a mixture of peas, beans, lentils, cummin, barley, millet, and spelt, but wheat was always its main constituent. Egypt was a great grain-producing country, and Abram (Gn 12:10) and Joseph’s brothers (ch 42) naturally turned to Egypt for wheat when famine visited Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>The mills, millstones, granaries, and threshing floors mentioned in the Bible all refer to equipment employed in processing grain to produce flour. The fine flour of which the showbread loaves were made (Lv 24:5) was unquestionably wheat flour. Wheat intended for home consumption was often stored in the central part of the house; this explains the story told in 2 Samuel 4:6. It was also sometimes stored in dry wells (2 Sm 17:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wormwood\">Wormwood <em>(Artemisia judaica, A. herba-alba)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Wormwood is a general name given to a group of woody plants with a strong aromatic odor. Wormwood plants have a strong, bitter taste, and their young shoots and branch tips furnish the “wormwood” of commerce. Its bitter taste accounts for its being spoken of with gall—as being symbolic of bitter calamity and sorrow (Prv 5:4; Jer 9:15; 23:15; Lam 3:15, 19). <em>Artemisia herba-alba<\/em> is the common species of wormwood in the Holy Land today. It is strongly aromatic, smelling like camphor, and bitter. <em>A. judaica<\/em> occurs only in the Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>Absinthe is made from species of this group. It first leads to greater activity and pleasant sensations and fills the mind with grandiose ideas (Lam 3:15). The habitual use of it, however, brings on a stupor and gradual diminution of intellectual faculties, ending in delirium and even death. Perhaps the hemlock of Amos 6:12 was wormwood.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PLANTS Identifying biblical plants has always been a difficult task, partly because people continue to identify the biblical elm, sycamore, lily, rose, and vine with modern plants, and also because they assume that all the plants now growing in the Holy Land were there in ancient biblical days, or that the plants referred to in the Bible are still to be found there today. Unfortunately, many plants now quite common in the Holy Land were not there in biblical days. Many plants that once grew i...","summary_en":"PLANTS Identifying biblical plants has always been a difficult task, partly because people continue to identify the biblical elm, sycamore, lily, rose, and vine with modern plants, and also because they assume that all the plants now growing in the Holy Land were there in ancient biblical days, or that the plants referred to in the Bible are still to be found there today. Unfortunately, many plants now quite common in the Holy Land were not there in biblical days. Many plants that once grew i...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44119,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:10","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The priest was required to wear <em>official linen clothing,<\/em> the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • <em>undergarments:<\/em> See Exod 20:26.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The priest was required to wear <em>official linen clothing,<\/em> the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • <em>undergarments:<\/em> See Exod 20:26.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:10 The priest was required to wear official linen clothing, the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • undergarments: See Exod 20:26.","summary_en":"6:10 The priest was required to wear official linen clothing, the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • undergarments: See Exod 20:26.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71745,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:10","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The priest was required to wear <em>official linen clothing,<\/em> the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • <em>undergarments:<\/em> See Exod 20:26.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The priest was required to wear <em>official linen clothing,<\/em> the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • <em>undergarments:<\/em> See Exod 20:26.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:10 The priest was required to wear official linen clothing, the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • undergarments: See Exod 20:26.","summary_en":"6:10 The priest was required to wear official linen clothing, the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • undergarments: See Exod 20:26.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99371,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:10","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The priest was required to wear <em>official linen clothing,<\/em> the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • <em>undergarments:<\/em> See Exod 20:26.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The priest was required to wear <em>official linen clothing,<\/em> the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • <em>undergarments:<\/em> See Exod 20:26.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:10 The priest was required to wear official linen clothing, the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • undergarments: See Exod 20:26.","summary_en":"6:10 The priest was required to wear official linen clothing, the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • undergarments: See Exod 20:26.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126997,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:10","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The priest was required to wear <em>official linen clothing,<\/em> the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • <em>undergarments:<\/em> See Exod 20:26.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The priest was required to wear <em>official linen clothing,<\/em> the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • <em>undergarments:<\/em> See Exod 20:26.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:10 The priest was required to wear official linen clothing, the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • undergarments: See Exod 20:26.","summary_en":"6:10 The priest was required to wear official linen clothing, the attire of his office, when officiating at the Tabernacle. This allowed everyone to know that he was there to carry out his official duties (Exod 28:40-43). The priest was to dress appropriately for service to the divine King. He was not to wear his official garb outside the Tabernacle (Lev 6:11; Ezek 44:19). • undergarments: See Exod 20:26.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":44120,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:11","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:11<\/strong> Most natural environments qualified as a <em>place that is ceremonially clean.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:11<\/strong> Most natural environments qualified as a <em>place that is ceremonially clean.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"6:11 Most natural environments qualified as a place that is ceremonially clean.","summary_en":"6:11 Most natural environments qualified as a place that is ceremonially clean.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71746,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:11","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:11<\/strong> Most natural environments qualified as a <em>place that is ceremonially clean.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:11<\/strong> Most natural environments qualified as a <em>place that is ceremonially clean.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"6:11 Most natural environments qualified as a place that is ceremonially clean.","summary_en":"6:11 Most natural environments qualified as a place that is ceremonially clean.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99372,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:11","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:11<\/strong> Most natural environments qualified as a <em>place that is ceremonially clean.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:11<\/strong> Most natural environments qualified as a <em>place that is ceremonially clean.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"6:11 Most natural environments qualified as a place that is ceremonially clean.","summary_en":"6:11 Most natural environments qualified as a place that is ceremonially clean.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126998,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:11","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:11<\/strong> Most natural environments qualified as a <em>place that is ceremonially clean.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:11<\/strong> Most natural environments qualified as a <em>place that is ceremonially clean.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"6:11 Most natural environments qualified as a place that is ceremonially clean.","summary_en":"6:11 Most natural environments qualified as a place that is ceremonially clean.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":44121,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:12","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:12-13<\/strong> This passage cautions that <em>the fire on the<\/em> bronze <em>altar<\/em> must be constantly tended and <em>never<\/em> allowed to <em>go out<\/em><em>,<\/em> perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:12-13<\/strong> This passage cautions that <em>the fire on the<\/em> bronze <em>altar<\/em> must be constantly tended and <em>never<\/em> allowed to <em>go out<\/em><em>,<\/em> perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:12-13 This passage cautions that the fire on the bronze altar must be constantly tended and never allowed to go out, perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).","summary_en":"6:12-13 This passage cautions that the fire on the bronze altar must be constantly tended and never allowed to go out, perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71747,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:12","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:12-13<\/strong> This passage cautions that <em>the fire on the<\/em> bronze <em>altar<\/em> must be constantly tended and <em>never<\/em> allowed to <em>go out<\/em><em>,<\/em> perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:12-13<\/strong> This passage cautions that <em>the fire on the<\/em> bronze <em>altar<\/em> must be constantly tended and <em>never<\/em> allowed to <em>go out<\/em><em>,<\/em> perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:12-13 This passage cautions that the fire on the bronze altar must be constantly tended and never allowed to go out, perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).","summary_en":"6:12-13 This passage cautions that the fire on the bronze altar must be constantly tended and never allowed to go out, perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99373,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:12","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:12-13<\/strong> This passage cautions that <em>the fire on the<\/em> bronze <em>altar<\/em> must be constantly tended and <em>never<\/em> allowed to <em>go out<\/em><em>,<\/em> perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:12-13<\/strong> This passage cautions that <em>the fire on the<\/em> bronze <em>altar<\/em> must be constantly tended and <em>never<\/em> allowed to <em>go out<\/em><em>,<\/em> perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:12-13 This passage cautions that the fire on the bronze altar must be constantly tended and never allowed to go out, perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).","summary_en":"6:12-13 This passage cautions that the fire on the bronze altar must be constantly tended and never allowed to go out, perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126999,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:12","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:12-13<\/strong> This passage cautions that <em>the fire on the<\/em> bronze <em>altar<\/em> must be constantly tended and <em>never<\/em> allowed to <em>go out<\/em><em>,<\/em> perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:12-13<\/strong> This passage cautions that <em>the fire on the<\/em> bronze <em>altar<\/em> must be constantly tended and <em>never<\/em> allowed to <em>go out<\/em><em>,<\/em> perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:12-13 This passage cautions that the fire on the bronze altar must be constantly tended and never allowed to go out, perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).","summary_en":"6:12-13 This passage cautions that the fire on the bronze altar must be constantly tended and never allowed to go out, perhaps anticipating the tragedy of the “wrong kind of fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu (10:1-2).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":28274,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60375,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Instructions","title_en":"God’s Instructions","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","summary_en":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88001,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Instructions","title_en":"God’s Instructions","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","summary_en":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115627,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Instructions","title_en":"God’s Instructions","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","summary_en":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143253,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Instructions","title_en":"God’s Instructions","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","summary_en":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":12809,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Frankincense","title_en":"Frankincense","content_ro":"<h3>FRANKINCENSE<\/h3>\n<p>Fragrant gum resin that can be ground into powder and burned to produce a balsamlike odor. It was often associated with myrrh (Sg 3:6; 4:6; Mt 2:11). Frankincense is obtained from balsam trees of the genus <em>Boswellia,<\/em> specifically the species <em>B. carterii, B. papyrifera,<\/em> and <em>B. thurifera.<\/em> These trees, which are related to turpentine trees, have star-shaped flowers that are pure white or green, tipped with rose. To obtain the resin, a deep incision is cut into the trunk, yielding an amber-colored gum. Since these trees were native only to Saba (Sheba) in southern Arabia (Is 60:6; Jer 6:20) and Somaliland, the resin was a costly item transported into Palestine by caravan. The so-called frankincense tree growing in Palestine (Ecclus 50:8) was probably <em>Commiphora opobalsamum<\/em> whose resin was used to produce perfume.<\/p>\n<p>Frankincense was used alone or with other materials for incense. It was one of the ingredients of the holy incense used for worship in the tabernacle (Ex 30:34). It was placed on the bread of the Presence (Lv 24:7) and mixed with oil on the cereal offerings (Lv 2:1-2, 14-16; 6:15), but it was excluded from the sin offering (5:11). A supply of frankincense was maintained in the Jerusalem temple (Neh 13:5, 9). It was later used in cosmetics and perfume (Sg 3:6). Both the costly value and its use for worship made the presentation of frankincense to the infant Jesus an appropriate gift (Mt 2:11). <em>See<\/em> Plants.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FRANKINCENSE<\/h3>\n<p>Fragrant gum resin that can be ground into powder and burned to produce a balsamlike odor. It was often associated with myrrh (Sg 3:6; 4:6; Mt 2:11). Frankincense is obtained from balsam trees of the genus <em>Boswellia,<\/em> specifically the species <em>B. carterii, B. papyrifera,<\/em> and <em>B. thurifera.<\/em> These trees, which are related to turpentine trees, have star-shaped flowers that are pure white or green, tipped with rose. To obtain the resin, a deep incision is cut into the trunk, yielding an amber-colored gum. Since these trees were native only to Saba (Sheba) in southern Arabia (Is 60:6; Jer 6:20) and Somaliland, the resin was a costly item transported into Palestine by caravan. The so-called frankincense tree growing in Palestine (Ecclus 50:8) was probably <em>Commiphora opobalsamum<\/em> whose resin was used to produce perfume.<\/p>\n<p>Frankincense was used alone or with other materials for incense. It was one of the ingredients of the holy incense used for worship in the tabernacle (Ex 30:34). It was placed on the bread of the Presence (Lv 24:7) and mixed with oil on the cereal offerings (Lv 2:1-2, 14-16; 6:15), but it was excluded from the sin offering (5:11). A supply of frankincense was maintained in the Jerusalem temple (Neh 13:5, 9). It was later used in cosmetics and perfume (Sg 3:6). Both the costly value and its use for worship made the presentation of frankincense to the infant Jesus an appropriate gift (Mt 2:11). <em>See<\/em> Plants.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FRANKINCENSE Fragrant gum resin that can be ground into powder and burned to produce a balsamlike odor. It was often associated with myrrh (Sg 3:6; 4:6; Mt 2:11). Frankincense is obtained from balsam trees of the genus Boswellia, specifically the species B. carterii, B. papyrifera, and B. thurifera. These trees, which are related to turpentine trees, have star-shaped flowers that are pure white or green, tipped with rose. To obtain the resin, a deep incision is cut into the trunk, yielding an...","summary_en":"FRANKINCENSE Fragrant gum resin that can be ground into powder and burned to produce a balsamlike odor. It was often associated with myrrh (Sg 3:6; 4:6; Mt 2:11). Frankincense is obtained from balsam trees of the genus Boswellia, specifically the species B. carterii, B. papyrifera, and B. thurifera. These trees, which are related to turpentine trees, have star-shaped flowers that are pure white or green, tipped with rose. To obtain the resin, a deep incision is cut into the trunk, yielding an...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17401,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Incense","title_en":"Incense","content_ro":"<h3>INCENSE<\/h3>\n<p>Fragrant spices and oils or sacrifice that sends up perfumed smoke to God in order to please him.<\/p>\n<p>People of every age have loved fragrant odors. In ancient times, sacrifices included sweet smells to make the deity happy. The aroma was a crucial factor in whether the god would accept the offering. Therefore, aromatic plants and exotic perfumes were precious for both secular and religious purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Spices and precious oils were valued along with silver and gold. The queen of Sheba brought spices to Solomon as a gift (1 Kgs 10:2). Incense was kept in the royal treasury (2 Kgs 20:13). The price of spices and oils was extremely inflated because of the difficult work of extracting the juices, transportation costs to import them from faraway places, and high profits for merchants who sold the perfumes.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, lovers sometimes compared their beloved to “myrrh,” a “mountain of myrrh” and a “hill of frankincense” (Sg 1:13; 4:6). The fragrance of incense set the right mood (1:12). Every spice known to a merchant burned beside the couch of Solomon (3:6). A bridegroom delighted in the perfumes of his beloved. She was his own private garden of incense (4:10-14). Even a prostitute burned incense beside her bed (Ez 23:41). No wonder wise men said that “fragrant oil” makes the heart glad and the “sweetness of friendship” comforts the soul (e.g., Prv 27:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofIncense\">Types of Incense<\/p>\n<p>Frankincense is mentioned most often in the Bible. It was imported from India, Somaliland, and Arabia Felix. Myrrh also came from Arabia Felix. Cinnamon was another important fragrance from Ceylon and China. Galbanum, tragacanth (gum), and laudanum all were grown in the mountains of Asia Minor. Galbanum was the most popular of these three, for it was also found in Turkestan, Persia, Syria, and Crete. Henna, saffron, and balsam came from aromatic plants native to Israel. In postexilic times other plants were introduced to Palestine and cultivated there: the rose, narcissus, and jasmine. Onycha seems to have been produced from the local fauna, and musk (muskin) may have been extracted from a gland of the musk deer.<\/p>\n<p>Incense itself came in many forms. It might be used as granules placed in a bag hung around the neck (Sg 1:13). In the main, however, perfumes were in a liquid form, dissolved in olive oil. A good example of this is the “holy anointing oil” (Ex 30:31). Such oils were used to anoint the priests and kings of Israel. Only priests were allowed to prepare and administer them. The incense contained raw spices beaten into a fine consistency and seasoned with salt to make them holy. Stacte, onycha, galbanum, and pure frankincense were mixed in equal proportions, all according to the art of the perfumer (Ex 30:34-37). The spices and incense for the sanctuary were donated as gifts (Nm 7:14-86; Jer 17:26; 41:5) and kept in the temple (Neh 13:5, 9). Josephus described the incense of his day as a much more complicated compound. He listed 13 ingredients in the best incense of the Herodian era.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IncenseOffering\">Incense Offering<\/p>\n<p>Archaeology has demonstrated that incense offerings were common throughout the ancient Near East from the earliest times of organized worship. Egyptian paintings and reliefs from the New Kingdom occasionally show a man holding a censer of burning incense. Incense seems to have been used as well in the rituals of Assyria, Babylonia, and Arabia. Canaanite altars found at Megiddo and Tell Beit Mirsim have horned limestone altars (10th century <span>BC<\/span>) that may have been designed to hold a bowl of incense. Hence, it is safe to assume that incense offerings also played some part in the worship of Israel from the beginning.<\/p>\n<p>Incense offerings seem to have served a multitude of purposes. They may have been used to drive away evil spirits and thereby sanctify all the utensils of the place of worship (Ex 30:26-29). Undoubtedly, the sweet smell of incense provided an antidote to the putrid odor of the animal sacrifices. Therefore, if God was to receive a sweet savor and thereby be pleased with an offering, incense was necessary to compensate for the smell of the sacrifices. However, spices were never added to the flesh of the animals or birds.<\/p>\n<p>In some instances, incense itself became a sacrifice. As a supplement to other sacrifices, frankincense alone was burned. To alleviate a plague, Aaron performed a ritual of burning incense (Nm 16:46-47). On the Day of Atonement, the high priest carried burning incense and hot coals on a pan (censer) into the Holy of Holies (Lv 16:12-13). The burning incense was thought to protect the life of the high priest, perhaps because the smoke kept him from seeing the full glory of God.<\/p>\n<p>Frankincense was added to grain for offerings on the altar of burnt offering (Lv 2:1, 15-16; 6:15). It also accompanied the bread of the Presence (24:7) in two dishes. The bronze serpent destroyed by Hezekiah in his reform had become a profane object to which incense was burned (2 Kgs 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Except on the Day of Atonement, the incense was offered on a special altar (Lv 4:7; cf. Ex 30:9), where it burned morning and evening and came to be called “perpetual incense” (Ex 30:7-8). Probably the altar of gold in Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 6:20-22) was the incense altar.<\/p>\n<p>Offering incense was a holy ritual, and persons who offered it with disrespect for procedures were condemned (Lv 10:1-2; Nm 16:6-50). Uzziah, the king of Judah, became a leper because he dared to offer incense (2 Chr 26:16-21). The burning of incense at “high places” is often criticized (e.g., 1 Kgs 22:43), either because the sanctuaries were idolatrous or because their priests did not take proper care as did the priesthood in Jerusalem. Prophets who criticized the offering of incense (Is 1:13; 66:3; Jer 6:20) did so to condemn a formalism that was void of devotion to the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MeaningofIncense\">Meaning of Incense<\/p>\n<p>Since incense was such a precious commodity, incense was a fitting offering to God (Mal 1:11). Incense offerings also provided a tangible sense of God’s holiness in which the people could experience atonement for sin (Nm 16:46-47). The smoke rising to the sky symbolized the prayers of the people (Ps 141:2; Lk 1:10; Rv 5:8; 8:3-4). At the same time, the smoke in the temple symbolized the presence of God as it had been portrayed by the cloud in the wilderness (Ex 19:18; 33:9-10; Nm 11:25). Together with the rising sun, the smoke provided a powerful symbol for the glory of the Lord (Is 6:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>The significance of incense is further enhanced by NT allusions. The Christian’s testimony about Christ is paralleled with the offering of incense (2 Cor 2:14-15). The sweet smell of the gospel is contrasted with the smell of death that leads to doom. Likewise, money from the Philippian Christians came to Paul in the spirit of an incense sacrifice (Phil 4:18), a costly expression of love and devotion. Finally, incense seems to sanctify and accompany the prayers of the saints into the presence of God (Rv 5:8; 8:3-4). None of the NT references call upon the Christian to offer incense, but rather to learn the devotion and dedication to holiness signified by the burning of this precious substance.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plants (Aloe; Balm; Calamus; Cinnamon; Frankincense; Galbanum; Henna; Hyssop; Myrrh; Nard; Storax Tree); Perfume; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INCENSE<\/h3>\n<p>Fragrant spices and oils or sacrifice that sends up perfumed smoke to God in order to please him.<\/p>\n<p>People of every age have loved fragrant odors. In ancient times, sacrifices included sweet smells to make the deity happy. The aroma was a crucial factor in whether the god would accept the offering. Therefore, aromatic plants and exotic perfumes were precious for both secular and religious purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Spices and precious oils were valued along with silver and gold. The queen of Sheba brought spices to Solomon as a gift (1 Kgs 10:2). Incense was kept in the royal treasury (2 Kgs 20:13). The price of spices and oils was extremely inflated because of the difficult work of extracting the juices, transportation costs to import them from faraway places, and high profits for merchants who sold the perfumes.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, lovers sometimes compared their beloved to “myrrh,” a “mountain of myrrh” and a “hill of frankincense” (Sg 1:13; 4:6). The fragrance of incense set the right mood (1:12). Every spice known to a merchant burned beside the couch of Solomon (3:6). A bridegroom delighted in the perfumes of his beloved. She was his own private garden of incense (4:10-14). Even a prostitute burned incense beside her bed (Ez 23:41). No wonder wise men said that “fragrant oil” makes the heart glad and the “sweetness of friendship” comforts the soul (e.g., Prv 27:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofIncense\">Types of Incense<\/p>\n<p>Frankincense is mentioned most often in the Bible. It was imported from India, Somaliland, and Arabia Felix. Myrrh also came from Arabia Felix. Cinnamon was another important fragrance from Ceylon and China. Galbanum, tragacanth (gum), and laudanum all were grown in the mountains of Asia Minor. Galbanum was the most popular of these three, for it was also found in Turkestan, Persia, Syria, and Crete. Henna, saffron, and balsam came from aromatic plants native to Israel. In postexilic times other plants were introduced to Palestine and cultivated there: the rose, narcissus, and jasmine. Onycha seems to have been produced from the local fauna, and musk (muskin) may have been extracted from a gland of the musk deer.<\/p>\n<p>Incense itself came in many forms. It might be used as granules placed in a bag hung around the neck (Sg 1:13). In the main, however, perfumes were in a liquid form, dissolved in olive oil. A good example of this is the “holy anointing oil” (Ex 30:31). Such oils were used to anoint the priests and kings of Israel. Only priests were allowed to prepare and administer them. The incense contained raw spices beaten into a fine consistency and seasoned with salt to make them holy. Stacte, onycha, galbanum, and pure frankincense were mixed in equal proportions, all according to the art of the perfumer (Ex 30:34-37). The spices and incense for the sanctuary were donated as gifts (Nm 7:14-86; Jer 17:26; 41:5) and kept in the temple (Neh 13:5, 9). Josephus described the incense of his day as a much more complicated compound. He listed 13 ingredients in the best incense of the Herodian era.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IncenseOffering\">Incense Offering<\/p>\n<p>Archaeology has demonstrated that incense offerings were common throughout the ancient Near East from the earliest times of organized worship. Egyptian paintings and reliefs from the New Kingdom occasionally show a man holding a censer of burning incense. Incense seems to have been used as well in the rituals of Assyria, Babylonia, and Arabia. Canaanite altars found at Megiddo and Tell Beit Mirsim have horned limestone altars (10th century <span>BC<\/span>) that may have been designed to hold a bowl of incense. Hence, it is safe to assume that incense offerings also played some part in the worship of Israel from the beginning.<\/p>\n<p>Incense offerings seem to have served a multitude of purposes. They may have been used to drive away evil spirits and thereby sanctify all the utensils of the place of worship (Ex 30:26-29). Undoubtedly, the sweet smell of incense provided an antidote to the putrid odor of the animal sacrifices. Therefore, if God was to receive a sweet savor and thereby be pleased with an offering, incense was necessary to compensate for the smell of the sacrifices. However, spices were never added to the flesh of the animals or birds.<\/p>\n<p>In some instances, incense itself became a sacrifice. As a supplement to other sacrifices, frankincense alone was burned. To alleviate a plague, Aaron performed a ritual of burning incense (Nm 16:46-47). On the Day of Atonement, the high priest carried burning incense and hot coals on a pan (censer) into the Holy of Holies (Lv 16:12-13). The burning incense was thought to protect the life of the high priest, perhaps because the smoke kept him from seeing the full glory of God.<\/p>\n<p>Frankincense was added to grain for offerings on the altar of burnt offering (Lv 2:1, 15-16; 6:15). It also accompanied the bread of the Presence (24:7) in two dishes. The bronze serpent destroyed by Hezekiah in his reform had become a profane object to which incense was burned (2 Kgs 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Except on the Day of Atonement, the incense was offered on a special altar (Lv 4:7; cf. Ex 30:9), where it burned morning and evening and came to be called “perpetual incense” (Ex 30:7-8). Probably the altar of gold in Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 6:20-22) was the incense altar.<\/p>\n<p>Offering incense was a holy ritual, and persons who offered it with disrespect for procedures were condemned (Lv 10:1-2; Nm 16:6-50). Uzziah, the king of Judah, became a leper because he dared to offer incense (2 Chr 26:16-21). The burning of incense at “high places” is often criticized (e.g., 1 Kgs 22:43), either because the sanctuaries were idolatrous or because their priests did not take proper care as did the priesthood in Jerusalem. Prophets who criticized the offering of incense (Is 1:13; 66:3; Jer 6:20) did so to condemn a formalism that was void of devotion to the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MeaningofIncense\">Meaning of Incense<\/p>\n<p>Since incense was such a precious commodity, incense was a fitting offering to God (Mal 1:11). Incense offerings also provided a tangible sense of God’s holiness in which the people could experience atonement for sin (Nm 16:46-47). The smoke rising to the sky symbolized the prayers of the people (Ps 141:2; Lk 1:10; Rv 5:8; 8:3-4). At the same time, the smoke in the temple symbolized the presence of God as it had been portrayed by the cloud in the wilderness (Ex 19:18; 33:9-10; Nm 11:25). Together with the rising sun, the smoke provided a powerful symbol for the glory of the Lord (Is 6:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>The significance of incense is further enhanced by NT allusions. The Christian’s testimony about Christ is paralleled with the offering of incense (2 Cor 2:14-15). The sweet smell of the gospel is contrasted with the smell of death that leads to doom. Likewise, money from the Philippian Christians came to Paul in the spirit of an incense sacrifice (Phil 4:18), a costly expression of love and devotion. Finally, incense seems to sanctify and accompany the prayers of the saints into the presence of God (Rv 5:8; 8:3-4). None of the NT references call upon the Christian to offer incense, but rather to learn the devotion and dedication to holiness signified by the burning of this precious substance.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plants (Aloe; Balm; Calamus; Cinnamon; Frankincense; Galbanum; Henna; Hyssop; Myrrh; Nard; Storax Tree); Perfume; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INCENSE Fragrant spices and oils or sacrifice that sends up perfumed smoke to God in order to please him. People of every age have loved fragrant odors. In ancient times, sacrifices included sweet smells to make the deity happy. The aroma was a crucial factor in whether the god would accept the offering. Therefore, aromatic plants and exotic perfumes were precious for both secular and religious purposes. Spices and precious oils were valued along with silver and gold. The queen of Sheba broug...","summary_en":"INCENSE Fragrant spices and oils or sacrifice that sends up perfumed smoke to God in order to please him. People of every age have loved fragrant odors. In ancient times, sacrifices included sweet smells to make the deity happy. The aroma was a crucial factor in whether the god would accept the offering. Therefore, aromatic plants and exotic perfumes were precious for both secular and religious purposes. Spices and precious oils were valued along with silver and gold. The queen of Sheba broug...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":28279,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44122,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:16","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:16<\/strong> In this context <em>sacred place<\/em> does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:16<\/strong> In this context <em>sacred place<\/em> does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:16 In this context sacred place does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.","summary_en":"6:16 In this context sacred place does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71748,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:16","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:16<\/strong> In this context <em>sacred place<\/em> does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:16<\/strong> In this context <em>sacred place<\/em> does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:16 In this context sacred place does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.","summary_en":"6:16 In this context sacred place does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99374,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:16","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:16<\/strong> In this context <em>sacred place<\/em> does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:16<\/strong> In this context <em>sacred place<\/em> does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:16 In this context sacred place does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.","summary_en":"6:16 In this context sacred place does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127000,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:16","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:16<\/strong> In this context <em>sacred place<\/em> does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:16<\/strong> In this context <em>sacred place<\/em> does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:16 In this context sacred place does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.","summary_en":"6:16 In this context sacred place does not refer to the Holy Place at the heart of the Tabernacle but to any location within the Tabernacle complex, all of which were ceremonially clean and holy.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":22884,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Leaven*","title_en":"Leaven*","content_ro":"<h3>LEAVEN*<\/h3>\n<p>Any substance that produces fermentation when added to dough. Leaven may signify the dough already infected by leaven, which was put into the flour so that the leaven could pass through the entire mass before baking, or it may refer to dough that had risen through the influence of the leaven. The early Hebrews apparently depended on a piece of leavened dough for transmission of the leaven; not until much later were the lees of wine used as yeast.<\/p>\n<p>The ancient Israelites regularly ate leavened bread (Hos 7:4), but in the commemoration of the Passover they were forbidden to eat leavened bread or even to have it in their homes during the Passover season (Ex 13:7). This annual observance ensured that the people would not forget their hasty exodus from Egypt, when God’s command gave no time for the preparation of leavened bread. The people were forced to carry with them their kneading troughs and the dough from which they baked unleavened cakes to sustain them as they journeyed (Ex 12:34-39; Dt 16:3).<\/p>\n<p>Possibly because fermentation implied disintegration and corruption, leaven was excluded from all offerings placed on the altar to be sacrificed to God (Ex 23:18; 34:25). It was also not permitted in grain offerings (Lv 2:11; 6:17). Scripture does not tell us whether or not the showbread (or bread of the Presence) was unleavened, but the historian Josephus states that it was leavened (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 3.6.6).<\/p>\n<p>Two exceptions to this rule should be noted. Leaven could be used in offerings that were to be eaten by the priests or others. Leavened bread could accompany the peace offering (Lv 7:13), and it was sacrificed at the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) because it represented the ordinary daily food that God provided for his people (23:17).<\/p>\n<p>The slow working of the leaven proved to be a problem during the agricultural stage of Hebrew development, especially during the first busy days of harvest. Unleavened dough, therefore, became increasingly common for ordinary baking. This practice was encouraged by the growth of the idea that leaven represented decay and corruption, as did other fermented things. This view excluded leaven as inconsistent with the concept of the perfect holiness of God. Plutarch was expressing a long-held belief current also among other peoples when he wrote, “Now leaven is itself the offspring of corruption and corrupts the mass of dough with which it has been mixed.” The apostle Paul quotes a similar proverb in 1 Corinthians 5:6 and Galatians 5:9.<\/p>\n<p>The significant thing about leaven is its power, which may symbolize either good or evil. Usually, though not always, leaven was a symbol of evil in rabbinic thought. Jesus referred to leaven in the adverse sense when he used the word to describe the corrupt doctrine of Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 16:6, 11-12) and of Herod (Mk 8:15). The leaven of the Pharisees is elsewhere identified as hypocrisy (Lk 12:1; cf. Mt 23:28).<\/p>\n<p>Paul applies the same concept to moral corruption, warning that “a little leaven leavens the whole lump” and admonishing his readers to clean out the old leaven, that is, the vestiges of their unregenerate lives, and to live the Christian life with the “unleavened bread of sincerity and truth” (1 Cor 5:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, Christ uses the concept of leaven’s effect upon dough in its good sense to provide his disciples with a brief but memorable parable (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:20-21), wherein leaven illustrates the cumulative, pervasive influence of the kingdom of God on the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bread; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Food and Food Preparation; Unleavened Bread.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LEAVEN*<\/h3>\n<p>Any substance that produces fermentation when added to dough. Leaven may signify the dough already infected by leaven, which was put into the flour so that the leaven could pass through the entire mass before baking, or it may refer to dough that had risen through the influence of the leaven. The early Hebrews apparently depended on a piece of leavened dough for transmission of the leaven; not until much later were the lees of wine used as yeast.<\/p>\n<p>The ancient Israelites regularly ate leavened bread (Hos 7:4), but in the commemoration of the Passover they were forbidden to eat leavened bread or even to have it in their homes during the Passover season (Ex 13:7). This annual observance ensured that the people would not forget their hasty exodus from Egypt, when God’s command gave no time for the preparation of leavened bread. The people were forced to carry with them their kneading troughs and the dough from which they baked unleavened cakes to sustain them as they journeyed (Ex 12:34-39; Dt 16:3).<\/p>\n<p>Possibly because fermentation implied disintegration and corruption, leaven was excluded from all offerings placed on the altar to be sacrificed to God (Ex 23:18; 34:25). It was also not permitted in grain offerings (Lv 2:11; 6:17). Scripture does not tell us whether or not the showbread (or bread of the Presence) was unleavened, but the historian Josephus states that it was leavened (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 3.6.6).<\/p>\n<p>Two exceptions to this rule should be noted. Leaven could be used in offerings that were to be eaten by the priests or others. Leavened bread could accompany the peace offering (Lv 7:13), and it was sacrificed at the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) because it represented the ordinary daily food that God provided for his people (23:17).<\/p>\n<p>The slow working of the leaven proved to be a problem during the agricultural stage of Hebrew development, especially during the first busy days of harvest. Unleavened dough, therefore, became increasingly common for ordinary baking. This practice was encouraged by the growth of the idea that leaven represented decay and corruption, as did other fermented things. This view excluded leaven as inconsistent with the concept of the perfect holiness of God. Plutarch was expressing a long-held belief current also among other peoples when he wrote, “Now leaven is itself the offspring of corruption and corrupts the mass of dough with which it has been mixed.” The apostle Paul quotes a similar proverb in 1 Corinthians 5:6 and Galatians 5:9.<\/p>\n<p>The significant thing about leaven is its power, which may symbolize either good or evil. Usually, though not always, leaven was a symbol of evil in rabbinic thought. Jesus referred to leaven in the adverse sense when he used the word to describe the corrupt doctrine of Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 16:6, 11-12) and of Herod (Mk 8:15). The leaven of the Pharisees is elsewhere identified as hypocrisy (Lk 12:1; cf. Mt 23:28).<\/p>\n<p>Paul applies the same concept to moral corruption, warning that “a little leaven leavens the whole lump” and admonishing his readers to clean out the old leaven, that is, the vestiges of their unregenerate lives, and to live the Christian life with the “unleavened bread of sincerity and truth” (1 Cor 5:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, Christ uses the concept of leaven’s effect upon dough in its good sense to provide his disciples with a brief but memorable parable (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:20-21), wherein leaven illustrates the cumulative, pervasive influence of the kingdom of God on the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bread; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Food and Food Preparation; Unleavened Bread.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LEAVEN* Any substance that produces fermentation when added to dough. Leaven may signify the dough already infected by leaven, which was put into the flour so that the leaven could pass through the entire mass before baking, or it may refer to dough that had risen through the influence of the leaven. The early Hebrews apparently depended on a piece of leavened dough for transmission of the leaven; not until much later were the lees of wine used as yeast. The ancient Israelites regularly ate l...","summary_en":"LEAVEN* Any substance that produces fermentation when added to dough. Leaven may signify the dough already infected by leaven, which was put into the flour so that the leaven could pass through the entire mass before baking, or it may refer to dough that had risen through the influence of the leaven. The early Hebrews apparently depended on a piece of leavened dough for transmission of the leaven; not until much later were the lees of wine used as yeast. The ancient Israelites regularly ate l...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28180,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44123,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:17","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:17<\/strong> <em>yeast:<\/em> See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ <em>share<\/em> of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being <em>most holy.<\/em> See study note on 2:3.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:17<\/strong> <em>yeast:<\/em> See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ <em>share<\/em> of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being <em>most holy.<\/em> See study note on 2:3.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:17 yeast: See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ share of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being most holy. See study note on 2:3.","summary_en":"6:17 yeast: See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ share of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being most holy. See study note on 2:3.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71749,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:17","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:17<\/strong> <em>yeast:<\/em> See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ <em>share<\/em> of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being <em>most holy.<\/em> See study note on 2:3.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:17<\/strong> <em>yeast:<\/em> See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ <em>share<\/em> of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being <em>most holy.<\/em> See study note on 2:3.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:17 yeast: See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ share of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being most holy. See study note on 2:3.","summary_en":"6:17 yeast: See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ share of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being most holy. See study note on 2:3.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99375,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:17","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:17<\/strong> <em>yeast:<\/em> See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ <em>share<\/em> of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being <em>most holy.<\/em> See study note on 2:3.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:17<\/strong> <em>yeast:<\/em> See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ <em>share<\/em> of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being <em>most holy.<\/em> See study note on 2:3.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:17 yeast: See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ share of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being most holy. See study note on 2:3.","summary_en":"6:17 yeast: See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ share of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being most holy. See study note on 2:3.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127001,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:17","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:17<\/strong> <em>yeast:<\/em> See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ <em>share<\/em> of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being <em>most holy.<\/em> See study note on 2:3.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:17<\/strong> <em>yeast:<\/em> See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ <em>share<\/em> of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being <em>most holy.<\/em> See study note on 2:3.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:17 yeast: See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ share of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being most holy. See study note on 2:3.","summary_en":"6:17 yeast: See study note on 2:11. • The priests’ share of the grain offering had the practical value of providing their staple food—bread (7:9)—in addition to its theological significance as being most holy. See study note on 2:3.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":44124,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:18","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:18<\/strong> The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all <em>of Aaron’s male descendants<\/em>. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • <em>will become holy:<\/em> Or <em>must be holy;<\/em> also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness could not (Hag 2:12). If an unclean person encountered that which was holy, disaster could result (Lev 10:1-3; 1 Sam 6:19-20; 2 Sam 6:6-8).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:18<\/strong> The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all <em>of Aaron’s male descendants<\/em>. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • <em>will become holy:<\/em> Or <em>must be holy;<\/em> also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness could not (Hag 2:12). If an unclean person encountered that which was holy, disaster could result (Lev 10:1-3; 1 Sam 6:19-20; 2 Sam 6:6-8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:18 The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all of Aaron’s male descendants. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • will become holy: Or must be holy; also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness c...","summary_en":"6:18 The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all of Aaron’s male descendants. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • will become holy: Or must be holy; also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness c...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71750,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:18","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:18<\/strong> The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all <em>of Aaron’s male descendants<\/em>. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • <em>will become holy:<\/em> Or <em>must be holy;<\/em> also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness could not (Hag 2:12). If an unclean person encountered that which was holy, disaster could result (Lev 10:1-3; 1 Sam 6:19-20; 2 Sam 6:6-8).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:18<\/strong> The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all <em>of Aaron’s male descendants<\/em>. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • <em>will become holy:<\/em> Or <em>must be holy;<\/em> also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness could not (Hag 2:12). If an unclean person encountered that which was holy, disaster could result (Lev 10:1-3; 1 Sam 6:19-20; 2 Sam 6:6-8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:18 The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all of Aaron’s male descendants. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • will become holy: Or must be holy; also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness c...","summary_en":"6:18 The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all of Aaron’s male descendants. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • will become holy: Or must be holy; also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness c...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99376,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:18","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:18<\/strong> The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all <em>of Aaron’s male descendants<\/em>. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • <em>will become holy:<\/em> Or <em>must be holy;<\/em> also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness could not (Hag 2:12). If an unclean person encountered that which was holy, disaster could result (Lev 10:1-3; 1 Sam 6:19-20; 2 Sam 6:6-8).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:18<\/strong> The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all <em>of Aaron’s male descendants<\/em>. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • <em>will become holy:<\/em> Or <em>must be holy;<\/em> also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness could not (Hag 2:12). If an unclean person encountered that which was holy, disaster could result (Lev 10:1-3; 1 Sam 6:19-20; 2 Sam 6:6-8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:18 The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all of Aaron’s male descendants. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • will become holy: Or must be holy; also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness c...","summary_en":"6:18 The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all of Aaron’s male descendants. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • will become holy: Or must be holy; also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness c...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127002,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:18","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:18<\/strong> The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all <em>of Aaron’s male descendants<\/em>. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • <em>will become holy:<\/em> Or <em>must be holy;<\/em> also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness could not (Hag 2:12). If an unclean person encountered that which was holy, disaster could result (Lev 10:1-3; 1 Sam 6:19-20; 2 Sam 6:6-8).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:18<\/strong> The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all <em>of Aaron’s male descendants<\/em>. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • <em>will become holy:<\/em> Or <em>must be holy;<\/em> also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness could not (Hag 2:12). If an unclean person encountered that which was holy, disaster could result (Lev 10:1-3; 1 Sam 6:19-20; 2 Sam 6:6-8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:18 The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all of Aaron’s male descendants. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • will become holy: Or must be holy; also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness c...","summary_en":"6:18 The priestly share did not belong exclusively to the priest conducting the sacrifice; it was to be shared with all of Aaron’s male descendants. The text does not indicate why these offerings could be eaten only by the males while other offerings were available to all members of the priests’ families (see study note on 10:13-15; see also Num 18:20-24). • will become holy: Or must be holy; also in Lev 6:27. Though uncleanness could be spread by touch (ch 15), Haggai implied that holiness c...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":44125,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:19","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:19-23<\/strong> These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:19-23<\/strong> These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:19-23 These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).","summary_en":"6:19-23 These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71751,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:19","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:19-23<\/strong> These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:19-23<\/strong> These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:19-23 These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).","summary_en":"6:19-23 These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99377,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:19","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:19-23<\/strong> These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:19-23<\/strong> These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:19-23 These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).","summary_en":"6:19-23 These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127003,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:19","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:19-23<\/strong> These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:19-23<\/strong> These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:19-23 These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).","summary_en":"6:19-23 These instructions applied only to the grain portion of the ordination offering (see 2:1-16; for the rest of the ordination offering, see 8:22-32).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":39850,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Aaron the Priest","title_en":"Aaron the Priest","content_ro":"<h3>Aaron the Priest<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Because it marked the beginning of the priesthood in Israel, the consecration of Aaron to his office was both instructive and solemn. Nothing was left to human ingenuity; all was precisely commanded of God. There were three ceremonies: washing, clothing, and anointing. When the tabernacle was finished, Aaron and his sons were set apart to the priesthood by washing (to signify purification), clothing with official garments (for beauty and glory), and anointing with oil (to picture the need of empowering by the Spirit; cf. Ex 28; 40:12-15; Lv 8). Aaron thus became the first high priest, serving nearly 40 years. The character of his office was hereditary; this is attested to by his sons’ wearing his garments when they succeeded to the office of high priest (Ex 29:29-30; Nm 20:25-28). Although all priests were anointed with oil, the anointing of Aaron and his successors was distinct from that of the ordinary priests (Ex 29:7; 40:12-15; Lv 8:12). Because the priesthood was inherited, all subsequent priests had to trace their ancestry back to Aaron (Ezr 7:1-5; Lk 1:5). Also, a sharp distinction was always drawn between the family of Aaron and the rest of the Levites (cf. Nm 3:5). Thus, the high priest was designated as the anointed priest in a special sense (Lv 4:3-4; 6:20-22; 21:10).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Because of Aaron’s priestly role, the NT looks upon him as prefiguring the Messiah of Israel. Jesus Christ was appointed High Priest (Heb 3:1-2) in the same way God chose Aaron (Heb 5:1-5), but he was described as a greater high priest than Aaron (Heb 7:11-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Aaron the Priest<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Because it marked the beginning of the priesthood in Israel, the consecration of Aaron to his office was both instructive and solemn. Nothing was left to human ingenuity; all was precisely commanded of God. There were three ceremonies: washing, clothing, and anointing. When the tabernacle was finished, Aaron and his sons were set apart to the priesthood by washing (to signify purification), clothing with official garments (for beauty and glory), and anointing with oil (to picture the need of empowering by the Spirit; cf. Ex 28; 40:12-15; Lv 8). Aaron thus became the first high priest, serving nearly 40 years. The character of his office was hereditary; this is attested to by his sons’ wearing his garments when they succeeded to the office of high priest (Ex 29:29-30; Nm 20:25-28). Although all priests were anointed with oil, the anointing of Aaron and his successors was distinct from that of the ordinary priests (Ex 29:7; 40:12-15; Lv 8:12). Because the priesthood was inherited, all subsequent priests had to trace their ancestry back to Aaron (Ezr 7:1-5; Lk 1:5). Also, a sharp distinction was always drawn between the family of Aaron and the rest of the Levites (cf. Nm 3:5). Thus, the high priest was designated as the anointed priest in a special sense (Lv 4:3-4; 6:20-22; 21:10).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Because of Aaron’s priestly role, the NT looks upon him as prefiguring the Messiah of Israel. Jesus Christ was appointed High Priest (Heb 3:1-2) in the same way God chose Aaron (Heb 5:1-5), but he was described as a greater high priest than Aaron (Heb 7:11-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"Aaron the Priest Because it marked the beginning of the priesthood in Israel, the consecration of Aaron to his office was both instructive and solemn. Nothing was left to human ingenuity; all was precisely commanded of God. There were three ceremonies: washing, clothing, and anointing. When the tabernacle was finished, Aaron and his sons were set apart to the priesthood by washing (to signify purification), clothing with official garments (for beauty and glory), and anointing with oil (to pic...","summary_en":"Aaron the Priest Because it marked the beginning of the priesthood in Israel, the consecration of Aaron to his office was both instructive and solemn. Nothing was left to human ingenuity; all was precisely commanded of God. There were three ceremonies: washing, clothing, and anointing. When the tabernacle was finished, Aaron and his sons were set apart to the priesthood by washing (to signify purification), clothing with official garments (for beauty and glory), and anointing with oil (to pic...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":5639,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bread","title_en":"Bread","content_ro":"<h3>BREAD<\/h3>\n<p>Food made from the dough of flour or meal from grain.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"KindsofSeedUsedinMakingBread\">Kinds of Seed Used in Making Bread<\/p>\n<p>The Bible tells us that wheat, barley, rye, beans, lentils, millet, and manna were used in making bread.<\/p>\n<h5>Wheat<\/h5>\n<p>Wheat is mentioned frequently in Scripture (about 48 uses of four Hebrew words in the OT; 14 uses of one Greek word in the NT). The hard winter grain <em>(Triticum aestivuum)<\/em> remains the most popular with farmers of Palestine, who still sow in the fall and reap in the following summer.<\/p>\n<h5>Barley<\/h5>\n<p>Barley matures faster and produces more prolifically than wheat. The hail plague in Egypt destroyed the barley crop because it had ripened; at the same time wheat and rye had not matured (Ex 9:31-32). Barley is mentioned 32 times in the OT. Barley produced a crop even in time of famine (Ru 1:22; 2:17, 23; 3:2, 15, 17) and sold cheaper than wheat (2 Kgs 7:1, 16). Poorer people depended on barley. The boy who contributed his lunch to Jesus to feed 5,000 had barley bread (Jn 6:9, 13). Palestinians fed barley to cattle (1 Kgs 4:28). Barley on the stalk carries a larger husk with a long, wiry hair (thus the name in Hebrew means “long hair”), making chaff separation more difficult. The greater likelihood of extraneous matter in the flour, combined with the less-liked flavor, made barley cheaper.<\/p>\n<h5>Rye<\/h5>\n<p>“Rye” translates a Hebrew word appearing in various versions as “vetch,” “fitches,” or “spelt” (Ex 9:32; Is 28:25; Ez 4:9). A hardy grass, it produces a crop even on poor soil. Rye bread gained popularity in northern Europe and to some degree in Egypt (Ex 9:32). Isaiah 28:24-28 summarizes the farmers’ work in growing and threshing various seed crops. Jews occasionally made bread from rye (Ez 4:9), but normally used it for cattle feed.<\/p>\n<h5>Other Seeds<\/h5>\n<p>Beans, lentils, and millet were ground and mixed to make a bread, along with wheat, barley, and spelt (Ez 4:9). The prophet Ezekiel ate this concoction as a sign of the “defiled bread” the Jews would eat in captivity among the Gentiles.<\/p>\n<h5>Manna<\/h5>\n<p>Numbers 11:8 tells us that the people ground the manna in mills or beat it in a mortar and baked it in pans and made loaves of bread. However, in its prime state God called it bread (see Ex 16:4-32). It appeared as coriander seed (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:7); therefore, the dull white grains were smaller than wheat. The Hebrews complained they had not bread, and their souls hated “this light bread” (Nm 21:5, <span>kjv<\/span>). The psalmist called it “the bread of the angels” (Ps 78:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EquipmentUsedinMakingBread\">Equipment Used in Making Bread<\/p>\n<p>Bas-reliefs in Egyptian mastaba tombs illustrate most of the equipment used in ancient Near Eastern bakeries.<\/p>\n<h5>Sieve<\/h5>\n<p>A wicker strainerlike device helped separate small impurities from the grain.<\/p>\n<h5>Grindstones<\/h5>\n<p>A pair of stones were shaped so that a top stone turned against the bottom stone, crushing grain into flour.<\/p>\n<h5>Jars<\/h5>\n<p>Clay jars contained olive oil, water, and liquid leaven to be mixed with the flour to make dough (Lv 2:4; 1 Kgs 17:12-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Bowls<\/h5>\n<p>Kneading bowls (Ex 8:3; 12:34; Dt 28:5, 17), boards or tables made of wood, provided space for a thorough mixing of ingredients.<\/p>\n<h5>Pans<\/h5>\n<p>The poor used heated flat stones or the inside walls of their ovens as baking pans. Most people used iron griddles, plates, or pans (Lv 2:5; 6:21; 7:9; Nm 11:8; 1 Chr 9:31; 23:29; 2 Chr 35:13; Ez 4:3). These were often flat, with handles up to five feet (1.5 meters) long. The dough placed on the griddle was ready for the heat.<\/p>\n<h5>Ovens<\/h5>\n<p>Sometimes ovens had a chamber separated from the fire, but usually not. A fire of wood, dried grass (Mt 6:30), or dung (Ez 4:12, 15) heated the oven (Lv 2:4; 7:9; 11:35; 26:26; Hos 7:4-7). While the coals and oven walls retained their heat, the plate carrying bread was inserted. Flat, hard unleavened cakes, or small leavened cakes (Mt 14:17; Mk 6:38; Lk 9:13) were done in a few minutes. Large loaves about one foot in diameter would swell to more than three inches (7.6 centimeters) thick, would weigh more than two pounds (.9 kilogram), and required about 45 minutes for baking (1 Sm 17:17; 2 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Meals, Significance of; Bread of the Presence; Leaven; Unleavened Bread.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BREAD<\/h3>\n<p>Food made from the dough of flour or meal from grain.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"KindsofSeedUsedinMakingBread\">Kinds of Seed Used in Making Bread<\/p>\n<p>The Bible tells us that wheat, barley, rye, beans, lentils, millet, and manna were used in making bread.<\/p>\n<h5>Wheat<\/h5>\n<p>Wheat is mentioned frequently in Scripture (about 48 uses of four Hebrew words in the OT; 14 uses of one Greek word in the NT). The hard winter grain <em>(Triticum aestivuum)<\/em> remains the most popular with farmers of Palestine, who still sow in the fall and reap in the following summer.<\/p>\n<h5>Barley<\/h5>\n<p>Barley matures faster and produces more prolifically than wheat. The hail plague in Egypt destroyed the barley crop because it had ripened; at the same time wheat and rye had not matured (Ex 9:31-32). Barley is mentioned 32 times in the OT. Barley produced a crop even in time of famine (Ru 1:22; 2:17, 23; 3:2, 15, 17) and sold cheaper than wheat (2 Kgs 7:1, 16). Poorer people depended on barley. The boy who contributed his lunch to Jesus to feed 5,000 had barley bread (Jn 6:9, 13). Palestinians fed barley to cattle (1 Kgs 4:28). Barley on the stalk carries a larger husk with a long, wiry hair (thus the name in Hebrew means “long hair”), making chaff separation more difficult. The greater likelihood of extraneous matter in the flour, combined with the less-liked flavor, made barley cheaper.<\/p>\n<h5>Rye<\/h5>\n<p>“Rye” translates a Hebrew word appearing in various versions as “vetch,” “fitches,” or “spelt” (Ex 9:32; Is 28:25; Ez 4:9). A hardy grass, it produces a crop even on poor soil. Rye bread gained popularity in northern Europe and to some degree in Egypt (Ex 9:32). Isaiah 28:24-28 summarizes the farmers’ work in growing and threshing various seed crops. Jews occasionally made bread from rye (Ez 4:9), but normally used it for cattle feed.<\/p>\n<h5>Other Seeds<\/h5>\n<p>Beans, lentils, and millet were ground and mixed to make a bread, along with wheat, barley, and spelt (Ez 4:9). The prophet Ezekiel ate this concoction as a sign of the “defiled bread” the Jews would eat in captivity among the Gentiles.<\/p>\n<h5>Manna<\/h5>\n<p>Numbers 11:8 tells us that the people ground the manna in mills or beat it in a mortar and baked it in pans and made loaves of bread. However, in its prime state God called it bread (see Ex 16:4-32). It appeared as coriander seed (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:7); therefore, the dull white grains were smaller than wheat. The Hebrews complained they had not bread, and their souls hated “this light bread” (Nm 21:5, <span>kjv<\/span>). The psalmist called it “the bread of the angels” (Ps 78:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EquipmentUsedinMakingBread\">Equipment Used in Making Bread<\/p>\n<p>Bas-reliefs in Egyptian mastaba tombs illustrate most of the equipment used in ancient Near Eastern bakeries.<\/p>\n<h5>Sieve<\/h5>\n<p>A wicker strainerlike device helped separate small impurities from the grain.<\/p>\n<h5>Grindstones<\/h5>\n<p>A pair of stones were shaped so that a top stone turned against the bottom stone, crushing grain into flour.<\/p>\n<h5>Jars<\/h5>\n<p>Clay jars contained olive oil, water, and liquid leaven to be mixed with the flour to make dough (Lv 2:4; 1 Kgs 17:12-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Bowls<\/h5>\n<p>Kneading bowls (Ex 8:3; 12:34; Dt 28:5, 17), boards or tables made of wood, provided space for a thorough mixing of ingredients.<\/p>\n<h5>Pans<\/h5>\n<p>The poor used heated flat stones or the inside walls of their ovens as baking pans. Most people used iron griddles, plates, or pans (Lv 2:5; 6:21; 7:9; Nm 11:8; 1 Chr 9:31; 23:29; 2 Chr 35:13; Ez 4:3). These were often flat, with handles up to five feet (1.5 meters) long. The dough placed on the griddle was ready for the heat.<\/p>\n<h5>Ovens<\/h5>\n<p>Sometimes ovens had a chamber separated from the fire, but usually not. A fire of wood, dried grass (Mt 6:30), or dung (Ez 4:12, 15) heated the oven (Lv 2:4; 7:9; 11:35; 26:26; Hos 7:4-7). While the coals and oven walls retained their heat, the plate carrying bread was inserted. Flat, hard unleavened cakes, or small leavened cakes (Mt 14:17; Mk 6:38; Lk 9:13) were done in a few minutes. Large loaves about one foot in diameter would swell to more than three inches (7.6 centimeters) thick, would weigh more than two pounds (.9 kilogram), and required about 45 minutes for baking (1 Sm 17:17; 2 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Meals, Significance of; Bread of the Presence; Leaven; Unleavened Bread.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BREAD Food made from the dough of flour or meal from grain. Kinds of Seed Used in Making Bread The Bible tells us that wheat, barley, rye, beans, lentils, millet, and manna were used in making bread. Wheat Wheat is mentioned frequently in Scripture (about 48 uses of four Hebrew words in the OT; 14 uses of one Greek word in the NT). The hard winter grain (Triticum aestivuum) remains the most popular with farmers of Palestine, who still sow in the fall and reap in the following summer. Barley B...","summary_en":"BREAD Food made from the dough of flour or meal from grain. Kinds of Seed Used in Making Bread The Bible tells us that wheat, barley, rye, beans, lentils, millet, and manna were used in making bread. Wheat Wheat is mentioned frequently in Scripture (about 48 uses of four Hebrew words in the OT; 14 uses of one Greek word in the NT). The hard winter grain (Triticum aestivuum) remains the most popular with farmers of Palestine, who still sow in the fall and reap in the following summer. Barley B...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":28281,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44126,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:22","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:22<\/strong> Only the <em>high priest<\/em> could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:22<\/strong> Only the <em>high priest<\/em> could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:22 Only the high priest could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.","summary_en":"6:22 Only the high priest could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71752,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:22","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:22<\/strong> Only the <em>high priest<\/em> could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:22<\/strong> Only the <em>high priest<\/em> could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:22 Only the high priest could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.","summary_en":"6:22 Only the high priest could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99378,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:22","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:22<\/strong> Only the <em>high priest<\/em> could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:22<\/strong> Only the <em>high priest<\/em> could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:22 Only the high priest could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.","summary_en":"6:22 Only the high priest could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127004,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:22","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:22<\/strong> Only the <em>high priest<\/em> could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:22<\/strong> Only the <em>high priest<\/em> could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:22 Only the high priest could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.","summary_en":"6:22 Only the high priest could represent the priesthood as an institution, with all its constituent priests.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60368,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Instructions","title_en":"God’s Instructions","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","summary_en":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87994,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Instructions","title_en":"God’s Instructions","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","summary_en":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115620,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Instructions","title_en":"God’s Instructions","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","summary_en":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143246,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Instructions","title_en":"God’s Instructions","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Instructions<\/h3>\n<p>The common Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span> (which means “law”) to translate <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.”<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>law<\/em> often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span> of Moses, however, is instructional. It might embody law, but it also included stories (Lev 10:1-3), poetry (Deut 32:1-43), genealogies (Exod 6:14-25), and a number of other literary forms.<\/p>\n<p>There are other words properly translated “law,” and these are included within the body of instruction given to the Israelites. For example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khoq<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “statute,” refers to a law as it was given by the lawgiver—in this case, by God himself (e.g., Lev 6:22). It states a general principle, leaving its application open to interpretation by context or the courts. In Leviticus 18:4-5 and 19:37, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">khuqqah<\/span> (“decrees”) is paired with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishpatim<\/span> (“regulations”), a term indicating case laws. It would be impossible to write laws that cover every situation. A case law, therefore, refers to a court’s previous interpretation of a statute in certain cases; the court’s decisions in the past give guidance for deciding on similar cases in the present.<\/p>\n<p>Law is necessary, for there will always be people who need its restraint. And much of the content in the Torah can properly be described as “law.” But in a more general sense, the Torah allows God’s people to be instructed in who he is and who they are to be in light of that. Similarly, instruction in doctrine and godly living are an integral part of the church and its life-giving message to the world (Col 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:5; Exod 16:4; Lev 6:9, 14; Deut 17:8-13, 18-20; 2 Kgs 10:30-31; 22:8-20; Job 22:21-23; Pss 40:8; 78:9-12; Prov 6:20-23; 13:14; 28:9; Isa 8:20; Col 3:16; 2 Tim 3:14-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","summary_en":"God’s Instructions The common Hebrew word torah is translated “law” in most English versions. This translation comes from the use of the Greek word nomos (which means “law”) to translate torah in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament). However, torah is better understood as “teaching,” “instruction,” or “doctrine.” The term law often brings to mind an authority imposed by an external force (such as a government) and is often perceived as harsh and unbending. The torah of Moses, however, is ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":44127,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:23","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:23<\/strong> Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be <em>burned up entirely<\/em> and not<em> eaten.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:23<\/strong> Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be <em>burned up entirely<\/em> and not<em> eaten.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"6:23 Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be burned up entirely and not eaten.","summary_en":"6:23 Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be burned up entirely and not eaten.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71753,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:23","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:23<\/strong> Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be <em>burned up entirely<\/em> and not<em> eaten.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:23<\/strong> Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be <em>burned up entirely<\/em> and not<em> eaten.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"6:23 Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be burned up entirely and not eaten.","summary_en":"6:23 Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be burned up entirely and not eaten.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99379,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:23","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:23<\/strong> Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be <em>burned up entirely<\/em> and not<em> eaten.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:23<\/strong> Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be <em>burned up entirely<\/em> and not<em> eaten.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"6:23 Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be burned up entirely and not eaten.","summary_en":"6:23 Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be burned up entirely and not eaten.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127005,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:23","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:23<\/strong> Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be <em>burned up entirely<\/em> and not<em> eaten.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:23<\/strong> Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be <em>burned up entirely<\/em> and not<em> eaten.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"6:23 Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be burned up entirely and not eaten.","summary_en":"6:23 Normally, the bulk of a grain offering would go to the officiating priest (2:9-10). However, the grain offering described in 6:19-23 was for a special occasion—the ordination of the priests—and therefore was to be burned up entirely and not eaten.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":28224,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":28244,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\n<p>Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PerformanceandOrderofSacrifices\">Performance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\n<p>The grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>The sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\n<p>The second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>The burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\n<p>The order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>Each section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\n<p>In other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\n<p>When prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\n<p>For sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>The description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\n<p>The same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\n<p>The same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\n<p>The procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DescriptionofSacrifices\">Description of Sacrifices<\/p>\n<p>The ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\n<p>These two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n<p>1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>The offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\n<p>The choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n<p>1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Burnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Except for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\n<p>Certain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\n<p>A grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Peace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\n<p>A special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\n<p>Drink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\n<p>These sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n<p>1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\n<p>The first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\n<p>The priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>The ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\n<p>Only three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":3947,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bathing Bathe","title_en":"Bathing Bathe","content_ro":"<h3>BATHE, BATHING<\/h3>\n<p>To cleanse as with water; to wash oneself. In the Bible the terms “bathing” and “washing” translate, often interchangeably, a number of different words. One OT passage uses one Hebrew word for cleaning clothes, another for washing other objects, including the body (Lv 15:8-12).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s dry climate and scarcity of water discouraged bathing except where a stream or pool was available (2 Kgs 5:10; Jn 9:7). Yet people still washed babies at birth (Ez 16:4), dead bodies in preparation for burial (Acts 9:37), and sheep for their shearing (Sg 6:6). Frequent bathing of the whole body was probably reserved for the rich (Ex 2:5), but the prevalence of dust made frequent washing of the face, hands, and feet necessary (Gn 18:4; 19:2; 24:32; 43:24; Jgs 19:21; Sg 5:3). Good grooming for the privileged demanded washing of one’s body before anointing with oil (Ru 3:3; 2 Sm 12:20; Ez 23:41). A good host provided water for a guest’s feet (Gn 18:4; Jgs 19:21; Lk 7:44; Jn 13:4-5). To wash someone’s feet was the task of a servant. For anyone else to do so was a sign of humility (1 Sm 25:41; Lk 7:44-47; Jn 13:3-16; 1 Tm 5:10).<\/p>\n<p>Most biblical references to washing or bathing deal with ritual cleansing. Priests and Levites were required to wash their clothes and faces, and sometimes bodies, before approaching the altar and on ceremonial occasions (Ex 29:4; 30:19-21; 40:7, 12, 30-32; Nm 8:21). Before a slain animal was sacrificed, its legs and intestines were washed (Lv 1:9, 13; 8:21; 9:14). Anyone who was once unclean (e.g., a leper who was healed or someone who had experienced a genital discharge) had to wash his or her clothes and bathe to be ritually pure (Lv 14:8-10; 15:5-11, 21-27). Any garment that became polluted had to be ceremonially cleansed (Lv 6:27; 13:54).<\/p>\n<p>“Washing” is also used figuratively for a cleansing from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 4:4; Jer 2:22; 4:14; 1 Cor 6:11; Heb 10:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BATHE, BATHING<\/h3>\n<p>To cleanse as with water; to wash oneself. In the Bible the terms “bathing” and “washing” translate, often interchangeably, a number of different words. One OT passage uses one Hebrew word for cleaning clothes, another for washing other objects, including the body (Lv 15:8-12).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s dry climate and scarcity of water discouraged bathing except where a stream or pool was available (2 Kgs 5:10; Jn 9:7). Yet people still washed babies at birth (Ez 16:4), dead bodies in preparation for burial (Acts 9:37), and sheep for their shearing (Sg 6:6). Frequent bathing of the whole body was probably reserved for the rich (Ex 2:5), but the prevalence of dust made frequent washing of the face, hands, and feet necessary (Gn 18:4; 19:2; 24:32; 43:24; Jgs 19:21; Sg 5:3). Good grooming for the privileged demanded washing of one’s body before anointing with oil (Ru 3:3; 2 Sm 12:20; Ez 23:41). A good host provided water for a guest’s feet (Gn 18:4; Jgs 19:21; Lk 7:44; Jn 13:4-5). To wash someone’s feet was the task of a servant. For anyone else to do so was a sign of humility (1 Sm 25:41; Lk 7:44-47; Jn 13:3-16; 1 Tm 5:10).<\/p>\n<p>Most biblical references to washing or bathing deal with ritual cleansing. Priests and Levites were required to wash their clothes and faces, and sometimes bodies, before approaching the altar and on ceremonial occasions (Ex 29:4; 30:19-21; 40:7, 12, 30-32; Nm 8:21). Before a slain animal was sacrificed, its legs and intestines were washed (Lv 1:9, 13; 8:21; 9:14). Anyone who was once unclean (e.g., a leper who was healed or someone who had experienced a genital discharge) had to wash his or her clothes and bathe to be ritually pure (Lv 14:8-10; 15:5-11, 21-27). Any garment that became polluted had to be ceremonially cleansed (Lv 6:27; 13:54).<\/p>\n<p>“Washing” is also used figuratively for a cleansing from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 4:4; Jer 2:22; 4:14; 1 Cor 6:11; Heb 10:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BATHE, BATHING To cleanse as with water; to wash oneself. In the Bible the terms “bathing” and “washing” translate, often interchangeably, a number of different words. One OT passage uses one Hebrew word for cleaning clothes, another for washing other objects, including the body (Lv 15:8-12). Israel’s dry climate and scarcity of water discouraged bathing except where a stream or pool was available (2 Kgs 5:10; Jn 9:7). Yet people still washed babies at birth (Ez 16:4), dead bodies in preparat...","summary_en":"BATHE, BATHING To cleanse as with water; to wash oneself. In the Bible the terms “bathing” and “washing” translate, often interchangeably, a number of different words. One OT passage uses one Hebrew word for cleaning clothes, another for washing other objects, including the body (Lv 15:8-12). Israel’s dry climate and scarcity of water discouraged bathing except where a stream or pool was available (2 Kgs 5:10; Jn 9:7). Yet people still washed babies at birth (Ez 16:4), dead bodies in preparat...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12381,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Flesh","title_en":"Flesh","content_ro":"<h3>FLESH<\/h3>\n<p>The body; the physical being of humans; the human person and human existence; the carnal nature of humans.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Term commonly used to designate the material stuff of the body, whether of people (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). However, “flesh” is used in the OT with a variety of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equivalent for the whole body (Prv 14:30), and the meaning is extended to designate the whole person (“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9, <span>kjv<\/span>). This idea leads to the union of two different persons, man and wife as “one flesh” (Gn 2:24), and a man can say of his relatives, “I am your bone and your flesh” (Jgs 9:2). The idea of flesh as the whole person leads to the expression “all flesh,” denoting the totality of humankind, sometimes including also the animal world.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the most distinctive use of “flesh” in the OT is found in those passages where it designates human weakness and frailty over against God. “My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for he is flesh” (Gn 6:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). In Psalm 78:39, God attributes sin to the fact that men are but flesh. In 2 Chronicles 32:8 the arm of flesh of the king of Assyria (i.e., his weakness) is contrasted with the all-powerful God. The one who puts trust in God need not fear what “flesh” can do (Ps 56:4), but the one who puts trust in human flesh instead of in God is under a curse (Jer 17:5). In Isaiah 31:3 flesh is contrasted with spirit, as weakness is with strength.<\/p>\n<p>However, nowhere in the OT is flesh viewed as sinful. Flesh is conceived as being created by God of the dust of the earth (Gn 2:7), and as God’s creation, it is good.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Paul ascribes many—often unique—definitions to the word “flesh” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as the Stuff of the Body<\/h5>\n<p>“Flesh” is frequently used to describe the tissues that constitute the body. There are different kinds of flesh—“of men,” “of animals,” “of birds,” “of fish” (1 Cor 15:39). Pain and suffering may be experienced in the flesh (2 Cor 12:7). Circumcision is done in the flesh (Rom 2:28). While “flesh” in such references is not sinful, it is corruptible and cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 15:50). Jesus’ body was also a body of flesh (Col 1:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as the Body Itself<\/h5>\n<p>By a natural transition, the part is used for the whole, and in many places “flesh” is synonymous with the body as a whole rather than designating the fleshy part of the body. Paul may thus speak either of being absent in the body (1 Cor 5:3) or in the flesh (Col 2:5). Paul can say that the life of Jesus may be manifested in our body or in our mortal flesh (2 Cor 4:10-11). “He who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body with her. For, as it is written, ‘The two shall become one flesh’ ” (1 Cor 6:16, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Person with Reference to Origin<\/h5>\n<p>Following OT usage, “flesh” was used by Paul to refer not merely to the stuff of the body or to the body itself, but concretely to the person as constituted by flesh. In this usage the word may refer to the person’s human relationship, the physical origin and the natural ties that bind one to other humans. Paul speaks of his kinsmen “according to the flesh,” his fellow Jews (Rom 9:3, <span>kjv<\/span>), and even uses “my flesh” (11:14, <span>kjv<\/span>) as a synonym for these kinsmen. The “children of the flesh” (9:8) are those born by natural generation in contrast to those born as a result of divine intervention. Christ was descended from David according to the flesh (1:3). The phrase does not designate the source merely of his bodily life but of his entire human existence, including both his body and his human spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Human Existence<\/h5>\n<p>Another use of “flesh” simply designates human existence. As long as a person lives in the body, that one is “in the flesh.” Thus, Paul can speak of the life that he lives “in the flesh” as lived by faith in the Son of God (Gal 2:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). Referring to Jesus’ earthly ministry, Paul says that he abolished “in the flesh” the enmity between Jew and Gentile (Eph 2:15). Peter has the same meaning when he speaks of Jesus having been put to death “in the flesh” (1 Pt 3:18). So also John: “Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” (1 Jn 4:2). This usage is reflected most notably in the Johannine saying “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Human Existence in Terms of Outward Presentation<\/h5>\n<p>“Flesh” also extends beyond humans in their bodily life to include other factors crucial to human existence. Thus, “confidence in the flesh” (Phil 3:3, <span>rsv<\/span>) does not mean confidence in the body but confidence in the whole complex of the outward realm of human existence. It includes Paul’s Jewish ancestry, his strict religious training, his zeal, and his prominence in Jewish religious circles. The phrase to “glory after the flesh” (2 Cor 11:18, <span>kjv<\/span>) is rendered “boast about their human achievements” in the <span>nlt<\/span>. A good showing “in the flesh” is practically synonymous with worldly prominence (Gal 6:11-14). The Judaizers insisted upon circumcision to promote a sense of prideful attainment in the religious life so that they might have a ground of glorying. But these external distinctions and grounds for glorying no longer appealed to Paul, because the world had been crucified to him and he to the world.<\/p>\n<p>“Flesh” is also used of outward relationships, as when describing the social ties existing between slave and master (Eph 6:5; Col 3:22; Phlm 1:16). “In the flesh” also describes the realm of marital relationships, which entails certain troublesome problems (1 Cor 7:28).<\/p>\n<p>This usage illuminates an otherwise difficult saying, “Henceforth know we no man after the flesh; yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more” (2 Cor 5:16, <span>kjv<\/span>). The <span>rsv<\/span> correctly renders the phrase “from a human point of view.” The verse does not mean that Paul had heard and seen Jesus in Jerusalem at some previous time and had gained some acquaintance with Christ “after the flesh.” “After the flesh” modifies the verb “to know,” not the noun “Christ.” Before his conversion, Paul knew all people “after the flesh”; that is, he judged them by worldly, human standards. To know Christ “after the flesh” means to look at him through merely human eyes. As a Jew, Paul had felt that Jesus was a deluded messianic pretender. According to the Jewish understanding, the Messiah was to reign over the earth as a Davidic king, save his people Israel, and punish the hated Gentiles. But Paul surrendered this false human view and came to know Christ as he really is—the incarnate Son of God, the Savior of all who believe. As a Christian, Paul no longer judged others according to the flesh.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Fallen Humanity<\/h5>\n<p>When Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 15:50, <span>rsv<\/span>), he does not mean that humans cannot inherit the kingdom of God but rather that human fallenness cannot; as the next clause shows, “neither does corruption inherit incorruption.” The weak, fallen, corruptible body cannot inherit the kingdom of God; there must be a change; the “corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality” (1 Cor 15:53, <span>kjv<\/span>). This is not the salvation of the soul or spirit but the exchange of one kind of body for another that is suited to the final glorious kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>When Peter confessed the messiahship of Jesus, Jesus replied, “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). The meaning of this verse is obvious. This knowledge of Jesus’ messiahship was not a human deduction; it could be achieved only by divine revelation.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Sinful Humanity<\/h5>\n<p>There remains a group of ethical references that are distinctly Pauline. The most important feature of this usage is that man is seen not only as fallen and weak before God, but as fallen and sinful. Flesh is contrasted with human spirit regenerated by the divine Spirit, and without the aid of the Spirit, one cannot please God. The most vivid passage is the first part of Romans 8, where Paul sharply contrasts those who are “in the flesh” with those who are “in the Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit” in this sense does not mean to be in a state of ecstasy but to be living one’s life in that spiritual realm that is controlled by the Spirit of God. Those who are “in the flesh,” that is, unregenerate, cannot please God. There are two contrasting and mutually exclusive realms: “in the flesh” and “in the Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit” means to be indwelt by God’s Holy Spirit, that is, to be a regenerate person.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 7–8 Paul makes it clear that the unregenerate person cannot please God by loving and serving him as God requires. Thus, the Law was unable to make mankind truly righteous, because the flesh is weak (8:2). To live after the flesh is death; to live after the Spirit is life (8:6). Elsewhere Paul says, “For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing” (7:18, <span>kjv<\/span>). Flesh here cannot be the physical flesh, for the body of flesh is the temple of the Spirit (1 Cor 6:19) and a member of Christ (6:15) and is to be the means of glorifying God (6:20). Paul, therefore, means that in his unregenerate nature there dwells none of the goodness that God demands.<\/p>\n<p>While Paul makes a sharp and absolute contrast between being “in the flesh” (unregenerate) and “in the Spirit” (regenerate), when one becomes regenerate and comes to be “in the Spirit,” that person is no longer in the flesh, but the flesh is still in him. In fact, there remains in the believer a struggle between the flesh and the Spirit. Writing to people who are “in the Spirit,” Paul says, “For the flesh lusteth [strives] against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would” (Gal 5:17, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because the Christian life is the battleground of these two opposing principles, it is impossible to be the perfect person that one would wish to be.<\/p>\n<p>The same situation is reflected in 1 Corinthians 2:14–3:3 where Paul describes three classes of people: the “natural” (2:14, <span>kjv<\/span>); the “carnal,” that is, fleshly man (3:1, 3, <span>kjv<\/span>); and the “spiritual man” (3:1, <span>kjv<\/span>). The “natural man” is unregenerate. Those who are “in the flesh” (Rom 8:9) have devoted the whole of their life to the human level and hence are unable to know the things of God. “Spiritual man” refers to those whose life is ruled by the Spirit of God, so that the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23) are evident in their life. Between these two there is a third class—those who are “fleshly” yet who are babes in Christ. Therefore, they must be “in the Spirit,” yet they do not walk “according to the Spirit.” Because they are “babes in Christ,” the Spirit of God dwells in them, yet the Holy Spirit is not allowed to have full control over them, and they are still walking “like men” (1 Cor 3:3), manifesting the works of the flesh in jealousy and strife.<\/p>\n<h5>Works of the Flesh<\/h5>\n<p>In Galatians 5:19-23 Paul contrasts the life in the flesh and the life in the Spirit: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (Gal 5:19-21, <span>kjv<\/span>). The important thing to note about this list is that while some of these are sins of bodily and sexual appetite, others are religious sins—idolatry, witchcraft—and several are sins “of the spirit,” that is, of the disposition—hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife. The words “seditions” and “heresies” refer not to theological heresies but to a factious, divisive spirit. This proves conclusively that for Paul the “flesh” is not synonymous with the body but includes the whole person, with all the inner attitudes and disposition.<\/p>\n<h5>Victory over the Flesh<\/h5>\n<p>While a struggle remains in the Christian between the Spirit and the flesh, Paul knows of a way of victory for the Spirit. The flesh of the body comes within the sphere of sanctification (1 Thes 5:23), but the flesh as the unregenerate human nature can only be put to death.<\/p>\n<p>This is called the tension between the objective and the subjective. Because certain things have happened in Christ (objective), certain inevitable results should accrue (subjective). In Paul’s view, the flesh has already been put to death in the death of Christ. Those who belong to Christ have already crucified the flesh with its passions and desires (Gal 5:24). Paul elsewhere says, “I have been crucified with Christ” (2:20) and “our old self was crucified with him” (Rom 6:6). Such references make it clear that “flesh” and the “self” are in some ways to be identified. This identity is further supported in the teaching about crucifixion, for Paul means the same thing by the crucifixion of the flesh that he means when he says, “How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? We were baptized into his death. We are buried with him by baptism into death” (vv 1-4). It is I myself who have died with Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This crucifixion and death of the flesh does not, however, work automatically. It is an event that must be appropriated by faith. This involves two aspects. First, believers are to recognize that the flesh has been crucified with Christ. “Reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom 6:11, <span>kjv<\/span>). One cannot consider the self dead with Christ to sin unless that person has actually died and been crucified with Christ, but because this has already happened at the moment of saving faith, it can be put into daily practice. Those who have died with Christ are to “mortify [put to death] the deeds of the body” (8:13, <span>kjv<\/span>). “Body” is here used as a vehicle for the works of the “flesh”—the sensual life of the unregenerate nature. Those who have been brought from death into life are to yield their members to God as instruments of righteousness (6:13). One who has died with Christ is to “mortify” (<span>kjv<\/span>), that is, put to death what is earthly—fornication, uncleanness, covetousness (Col 3:5). Having already put off the old nature and put on the new, the believer is to put on compassion, kindness, lowliness and the like.<\/p>\n<p>Victory over the flesh is sometimes described as walking in the Spirit. “Walk by the Spirit, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh” (Gal 5:16, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Rom 8:4). Walking in the Spirit means to live each moment under the control of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Body; Sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FLESH<\/h3>\n<p>The body; the physical being of humans; the human person and human existence; the carnal nature of humans.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Term commonly used to designate the material stuff of the body, whether of people (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). However, “flesh” is used in the OT with a variety of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equivalent for the whole body (Prv 14:30), and the meaning is extended to designate the whole person (“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9, <span>kjv<\/span>). This idea leads to the union of two different persons, man and wife as “one flesh” (Gn 2:24), and a man can say of his relatives, “I am your bone and your flesh” (Jgs 9:2). The idea of flesh as the whole person leads to the expression “all flesh,” denoting the totality of humankind, sometimes including also the animal world.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the most distinctive use of “flesh” in the OT is found in those passages where it designates human weakness and frailty over against God. “My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for he is flesh” (Gn 6:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). In Psalm 78:39, God attributes sin to the fact that men are but flesh. In 2 Chronicles 32:8 the arm of flesh of the king of Assyria (i.e., his weakness) is contrasted with the all-powerful God. The one who puts trust in God need not fear what “flesh” can do (Ps 56:4), but the one who puts trust in human flesh instead of in God is under a curse (Jer 17:5). In Isaiah 31:3 flesh is contrasted with spirit, as weakness is with strength.<\/p>\n<p>However, nowhere in the OT is flesh viewed as sinful. Flesh is conceived as being created by God of the dust of the earth (Gn 2:7), and as God’s creation, it is good.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Paul ascribes many—often unique—definitions to the word “flesh” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as the Stuff of the Body<\/h5>\n<p>“Flesh” is frequently used to describe the tissues that constitute the body. There are different kinds of flesh—“of men,” “of animals,” “of birds,” “of fish” (1 Cor 15:39). Pain and suffering may be experienced in the flesh (2 Cor 12:7). Circumcision is done in the flesh (Rom 2:28). While “flesh” in such references is not sinful, it is corruptible and cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 15:50). Jesus’ body was also a body of flesh (Col 1:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as the Body Itself<\/h5>\n<p>By a natural transition, the part is used for the whole, and in many places “flesh” is synonymous with the body as a whole rather than designating the fleshy part of the body. Paul may thus speak either of being absent in the body (1 Cor 5:3) or in the flesh (Col 2:5). Paul can say that the life of Jesus may be manifested in our body or in our mortal flesh (2 Cor 4:10-11). “He who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body with her. For, as it is written, ‘The two shall become one flesh’ ” (1 Cor 6:16, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Person with Reference to Origin<\/h5>\n<p>Following OT usage, “flesh” was used by Paul to refer not merely to the stuff of the body or to the body itself, but concretely to the person as constituted by flesh. In this usage the word may refer to the person’s human relationship, the physical origin and the natural ties that bind one to other humans. Paul speaks of his kinsmen “according to the flesh,” his fellow Jews (Rom 9:3, <span>kjv<\/span>), and even uses “my flesh” (11:14, <span>kjv<\/span>) as a synonym for these kinsmen. The “children of the flesh” (9:8) are those born by natural generation in contrast to those born as a result of divine intervention. Christ was descended from David according to the flesh (1:3). The phrase does not designate the source merely of his bodily life but of his entire human existence, including both his body and his human spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Human Existence<\/h5>\n<p>Another use of “flesh” simply designates human existence. As long as a person lives in the body, that one is “in the flesh.” Thus, Paul can speak of the life that he lives “in the flesh” as lived by faith in the Son of God (Gal 2:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). Referring to Jesus’ earthly ministry, Paul says that he abolished “in the flesh” the enmity between Jew and Gentile (Eph 2:15). Peter has the same meaning when he speaks of Jesus having been put to death “in the flesh” (1 Pt 3:18). So also John: “Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” (1 Jn 4:2). This usage is reflected most notably in the Johannine saying “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Human Existence in Terms of Outward Presentation<\/h5>\n<p>“Flesh” also extends beyond humans in their bodily life to include other factors crucial to human existence. Thus, “confidence in the flesh” (Phil 3:3, <span>rsv<\/span>) does not mean confidence in the body but confidence in the whole complex of the outward realm of human existence. It includes Paul’s Jewish ancestry, his strict religious training, his zeal, and his prominence in Jewish religious circles. The phrase to “glory after the flesh” (2 Cor 11:18, <span>kjv<\/span>) is rendered “boast about their human achievements” in the <span>nlt<\/span>. A good showing “in the flesh” is practically synonymous with worldly prominence (Gal 6:11-14). The Judaizers insisted upon circumcision to promote a sense of prideful attainment in the religious life so that they might have a ground of glorying. But these external distinctions and grounds for glorying no longer appealed to Paul, because the world had been crucified to him and he to the world.<\/p>\n<p>“Flesh” is also used of outward relationships, as when describing the social ties existing between slave and master (Eph 6:5; Col 3:22; Phlm 1:16). “In the flesh” also describes the realm of marital relationships, which entails certain troublesome problems (1 Cor 7:28).<\/p>\n<p>This usage illuminates an otherwise difficult saying, “Henceforth know we no man after the flesh; yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more” (2 Cor 5:16, <span>kjv<\/span>). The <span>rsv<\/span> correctly renders the phrase “from a human point of view.” The verse does not mean that Paul had heard and seen Jesus in Jerusalem at some previous time and had gained some acquaintance with Christ “after the flesh.” “After the flesh” modifies the verb “to know,” not the noun “Christ.” Before his conversion, Paul knew all people “after the flesh”; that is, he judged them by worldly, human standards. To know Christ “after the flesh” means to look at him through merely human eyes. As a Jew, Paul had felt that Jesus was a deluded messianic pretender. According to the Jewish understanding, the Messiah was to reign over the earth as a Davidic king, save his people Israel, and punish the hated Gentiles. But Paul surrendered this false human view and came to know Christ as he really is—the incarnate Son of God, the Savior of all who believe. As a Christian, Paul no longer judged others according to the flesh.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Fallen Humanity<\/h5>\n<p>When Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 15:50, <span>rsv<\/span>), he does not mean that humans cannot inherit the kingdom of God but rather that human fallenness cannot; as the next clause shows, “neither does corruption inherit incorruption.” The weak, fallen, corruptible body cannot inherit the kingdom of God; there must be a change; the “corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality” (1 Cor 15:53, <span>kjv<\/span>). This is not the salvation of the soul or spirit but the exchange of one kind of body for another that is suited to the final glorious kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>When Peter confessed the messiahship of Jesus, Jesus replied, “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). The meaning of this verse is obvious. This knowledge of Jesus’ messiahship was not a human deduction; it could be achieved only by divine revelation.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Sinful Humanity<\/h5>\n<p>There remains a group of ethical references that are distinctly Pauline. The most important feature of this usage is that man is seen not only as fallen and weak before God, but as fallen and sinful. Flesh is contrasted with human spirit regenerated by the divine Spirit, and without the aid of the Spirit, one cannot please God. The most vivid passage is the first part of Romans 8, where Paul sharply contrasts those who are “in the flesh” with those who are “in the Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit” in this sense does not mean to be in a state of ecstasy but to be living one’s life in that spiritual realm that is controlled by the Spirit of God. Those who are “in the flesh,” that is, unregenerate, cannot please God. There are two contrasting and mutually exclusive realms: “in the flesh” and “in the Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit” means to be indwelt by God’s Holy Spirit, that is, to be a regenerate person.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 7–8 Paul makes it clear that the unregenerate person cannot please God by loving and serving him as God requires. Thus, the Law was unable to make mankind truly righteous, because the flesh is weak (8:2). To live after the flesh is death; to live after the Spirit is life (8:6). Elsewhere Paul says, “For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing” (7:18, <span>kjv<\/span>). Flesh here cannot be the physical flesh, for the body of flesh is the temple of the Spirit (1 Cor 6:19) and a member of Christ (6:15) and is to be the means of glorifying God (6:20). Paul, therefore, means that in his unregenerate nature there dwells none of the goodness that God demands.<\/p>\n<p>While Paul makes a sharp and absolute contrast between being “in the flesh” (unregenerate) and “in the Spirit” (regenerate), when one becomes regenerate and comes to be “in the Spirit,” that person is no longer in the flesh, but the flesh is still in him. In fact, there remains in the believer a struggle between the flesh and the Spirit. Writing to people who are “in the Spirit,” Paul says, “For the flesh lusteth [strives] against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would” (Gal 5:17, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because the Christian life is the battleground of these two opposing principles, it is impossible to be the perfect person that one would wish to be.<\/p>\n<p>The same situation is reflected in 1 Corinthians 2:14–3:3 where Paul describes three classes of people: the “natural” (2:14, <span>kjv<\/span>); the “carnal,” that is, fleshly man (3:1, 3, <span>kjv<\/span>); and the “spiritual man” (3:1, <span>kjv<\/span>). The “natural man” is unregenerate. Those who are “in the flesh” (Rom 8:9) have devoted the whole of their life to the human level and hence are unable to know the things of God. “Spiritual man” refers to those whose life is ruled by the Spirit of God, so that the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23) are evident in their life. Between these two there is a third class—those who are “fleshly” yet who are babes in Christ. Therefore, they must be “in the Spirit,” yet they do not walk “according to the Spirit.” Because they are “babes in Christ,” the Spirit of God dwells in them, yet the Holy Spirit is not allowed to have full control over them, and they are still walking “like men” (1 Cor 3:3), manifesting the works of the flesh in jealousy and strife.<\/p>\n<h5>Works of the Flesh<\/h5>\n<p>In Galatians 5:19-23 Paul contrasts the life in the flesh and the life in the Spirit: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (Gal 5:19-21, <span>kjv<\/span>). The important thing to note about this list is that while some of these are sins of bodily and sexual appetite, others are religious sins—idolatry, witchcraft—and several are sins “of the spirit,” that is, of the disposition—hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife. The words “seditions” and “heresies” refer not to theological heresies but to a factious, divisive spirit. This proves conclusively that for Paul the “flesh” is not synonymous with the body but includes the whole person, with all the inner attitudes and disposition.<\/p>\n<h5>Victory over the Flesh<\/h5>\n<p>While a struggle remains in the Christian between the Spirit and the flesh, Paul knows of a way of victory for the Spirit. The flesh of the body comes within the sphere of sanctification (1 Thes 5:23), but the flesh as the unregenerate human nature can only be put to death.<\/p>\n<p>This is called the tension between the objective and the subjective. Because certain things have happened in Christ (objective), certain inevitable results should accrue (subjective). In Paul’s view, the flesh has already been put to death in the death of Christ. Those who belong to Christ have already crucified the flesh with its passions and desires (Gal 5:24). Paul elsewhere says, “I have been crucified with Christ” (2:20) and “our old self was crucified with him” (Rom 6:6). Such references make it clear that “flesh” and the “self” are in some ways to be identified. This identity is further supported in the teaching about crucifixion, for Paul means the same thing by the crucifixion of the flesh that he means when he says, “How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? We were baptized into his death. We are buried with him by baptism into death” (vv 1-4). It is I myself who have died with Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This crucifixion and death of the flesh does not, however, work automatically. It is an event that must be appropriated by faith. This involves two aspects. First, believers are to recognize that the flesh has been crucified with Christ. “Reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom 6:11, <span>kjv<\/span>). One cannot consider the self dead with Christ to sin unless that person has actually died and been crucified with Christ, but because this has already happened at the moment of saving faith, it can be put into daily practice. Those who have died with Christ are to “mortify [put to death] the deeds of the body” (8:13, <span>kjv<\/span>). “Body” is here used as a vehicle for the works of the “flesh”—the sensual life of the unregenerate nature. Those who have been brought from death into life are to yield their members to God as instruments of righteousness (6:13). One who has died with Christ is to “mortify” (<span>kjv<\/span>), that is, put to death what is earthly—fornication, uncleanness, covetousness (Col 3:5). Having already put off the old nature and put on the new, the believer is to put on compassion, kindness, lowliness and the like.<\/p>\n<p>Victory over the flesh is sometimes described as walking in the Spirit. “Walk by the Spirit, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh” (Gal 5:16, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Rom 8:4). Walking in the Spirit means to live each moment under the control of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Body; Sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FLESH The body; the physical being of humans; the human person and human existence; the carnal nature of humans. In the Old Testament Term commonly used to designate the material stuff of the body, whether of people (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). However, “flesh” is used in the OT with a variety of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equivalent for the whole body (Prv 14:30), and the meaning is extended to designate the whole person (“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9, kjv). This ...","summary_en":"FLESH The body; the physical being of humans; the human person and human existence; the carnal nature of humans. In the Old Testament Term commonly used to designate the material stuff of the body, whether of people (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). However, “flesh” is used in the OT with a variety of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equivalent for the whole body (Prv 14:30), and the meaning is extended to designate the whole person (“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9, kjv). This ...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":44128,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:28","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:28<\/strong> A <em>clay pot<\/em> was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a <em>bronze pot<\/em> could be thoroughly <em>scoured<\/em> to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:28<\/strong> A <em>clay pot<\/em> was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a <em>bronze pot<\/em> could be thoroughly <em>scoured<\/em> to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:28 A clay pot was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a bronze pot could be thoroughly scoured to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).","summary_en":"6:28 A clay pot was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a bronze pot could be thoroughly scoured to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71754,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:28","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:28<\/strong> A <em>clay pot<\/em> was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a <em>bronze pot<\/em> could be thoroughly <em>scoured<\/em> to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:28<\/strong> A <em>clay pot<\/em> was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a <em>bronze pot<\/em> could be thoroughly <em>scoured<\/em> to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:28 A clay pot was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a bronze pot could be thoroughly scoured to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).","summary_en":"6:28 A clay pot was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a bronze pot could be thoroughly scoured to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99380,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:28","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:28<\/strong> A <em>clay pot<\/em> was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a <em>bronze pot<\/em> could be thoroughly <em>scoured<\/em> to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:28<\/strong> A <em>clay pot<\/em> was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a <em>bronze pot<\/em> could be thoroughly <em>scoured<\/em> to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:28 A clay pot was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a bronze pot could be thoroughly scoured to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).","summary_en":"6:28 A clay pot was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a bronze pot could be thoroughly scoured to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127006,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:28","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:28<\/strong> A <em>clay pot<\/em> was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a <em>bronze pot<\/em> could be thoroughly <em>scoured<\/em> to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:28<\/strong> A <em>clay pot<\/em> was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a <em>bronze pot<\/em> could be thoroughly <em>scoured<\/em> to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:28 A clay pot was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a bronze pot could be thoroughly scoured to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).","summary_en":"6:28 A clay pot was porous and could not be cleansed as thoroughly as a metal one—some of the holy food might stick to it or soak in. Reuse would cause an act of sacrilege. However, a bronze pot could be thoroughly scoured to prevent this problem (see also 11:33; 15:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"30":[{"id":44129,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:30","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:30 Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).","summary_en":"6:30 Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71755,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:30","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:30 Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).","summary_en":"6:30 Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99381,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:30","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:30 Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).","summary_en":"6:30 Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127007,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 6:30","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 6:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:30 Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).","summary_en":"6:30 Some sin offerings for the anointed priest and for the entire congregation were not to be eaten. The blood of these offerings was carried into the Holy Place and sprinkled before the curtain (see 4:1-21). The sacrifices that could be eaten were those for the lay leader and for the common people. The blood of these animals was poured on and around the base of the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (see 4:22-35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Leviticul 6
— 30 versete
Leviticul 6
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse