3 “‘If his offering is a burnt offering from the herd, he shall offer a male without defect. He shall offer it at the door of the Tent of Meeting, that he may be accepted before Yahweh.
4 He shall lay his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.
5 He shall kill the bull before Yahweh. Aaron’s sons, the priests, shall present the blood and sprinkle the blood around on the altar that is at the door of the Tent of Meeting.
6 He shall skin the burnt offering and cut it into pieces.
7 The sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire on the altar, and lay wood in order on the fire;
8 and Aaron’s sons, the priests, shall lay the pieces, the head, and the fat in order on the wood that is on the fire which is on the altar;
9 but he shall wash its innards and its legs with water. The priest shall burn all of it on the altar, for a burnt offering, an offering made by fire, of a pleasant aroma to Yahweh.
10 “‘If his offering is from the flock, from the sheep or from the goats, for a burnt offering, he shall offer a male without defect.
11 He shall kill it on the north side of the altar before Yahweh. Aaron’s sons, the priests, shall sprinkle its blood around on the altar.
12 He shall cut it into its pieces, with its head and its fat. The priest shall lay them in order on the wood that is on the fire which is on the altar,
13 but the innards and the legs he shall wash with water. The priest shall offer the whole, and burn it on the altar. It is a burnt offering, an offering made by fire, of a pleasant aroma to Yahweh.
14 “‘If his offering to Yahweh is a burnt offering of birds, then he shall offer his offering from turtledoves or of young pigeons.
15 The priest shall bring it to the altar, and wring off its head, and burn it on the altar; and its blood shall be drained out on the side of the altar;
16 and he shall take away its crop and its feathers, and cast it beside the altar on the east part, in the place of the ashes.
17 He shall tear it by its wings, but shall not divide it apart. The priest shall burn it on the altar, on the wood that is on the fire. It is a burnt offering, an offering made by fire, of a pleasant aroma to Yahweh.
5 passages from writers of 2 traditions, in their own words, each with their dates and tradition. The site doesn’t say who is right: read them beside the verses. About these
Reading as
Questions they answer differently
On verse
Oldest first.
Josephus37–c. 100JewishAntiquities of the Jews · on Leviticus 1:3–13These sacrifices were of two sorts; of those sorts one was offered for private persons, and the other for the people in general; and they are done in two different ways. In the one case, what is slain is burnt, as a whole burnt-offering, whence that name is given to it; but the other is a thank-offering, and is designed for feasting those that sacrifice. … Suppose a private man offer a burnt-offering, he must slay either a bull, a lamb, or a kid of the goats, and the two latter of the first year, though of bulls he is permitted to sacrifice those of a greater age; but all burnt-offerings are to be of males. When they are slain, the priests sprinkle the blood round about the altar; they then cleanse the bodies, and divide them into parts, and salt them with salt, and lay them upon the altar, while the pieces of wood are piled one upon another, and the fire is burning; they next cleanse the feet of the sacrifices, and the inwards, in an accurate manner and so lay them to the rest to be purged by the fire, while the priests receive the hides.
These sacrifices were of two sorts; of those sorts one was offered for private persons, and the other for the people in general; and they are done in two different ways. In the one case, what is slain is burnt, as a whole burnt-offering, whence that name is given to it; but the other is a thank-offering, and is designed for feasting those that sacrifice. … Suppose a private man offer a burnt-offering, he must slay either a bull, a lamb, or a kid of the goats, and the two latter of the first year, though of bulls he is permitted to sacrifice those of a greater age; but all burnt-offerings are to be of males. When they are slain, the priests sprinkle the blood round about the altar; they then cleanse the bodies, and divide them into parts, and salt them with salt, and lay them upon the altar, while the pieces of wood are piled one upon another, and the fire is burning; they next cleanse the feet of the sacrifices, and the inwards, in an accurate manner and so lay them to the rest to be purged by the fire, while the priests receive the hides.
Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Antiquities 3.9.1; translated by William Whiston (1737); the text of Project Gutenberg. The edition
A Jewish priest from Jerusalem who fought Rome in the war of 66–70 and afterwards wrote the history of his people for Greek readers.
John Calvin1509–1564ReformedCommentaries · on Leviticus 1:4In the second place, it is prescribed that whosoever presented a burnt-offering should lay his hand on its head, after he had come near the door of the tabernacle. This ceremony was not only a sign of consecration, but also of its being an atonement, … since it was substituted for the man, as is expressed in the words of Moses, "And it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him." (Ver. 4.) There is not, then, the least doubt but that they transferred their guilt and whatever penalties they had deserved to the victims, in order that they might be reconciled to God. … yet still not as though these brute animals availed in themselves unto expiation, except in so far as they were testimonies of the grace to be manifested by Christ. … Hence it follows that these symbols were useful only as they were exercises unto faith and repentance, so that the sinner might learn to fear God's wrath, and to seek pardon in Christ.
In the second place, it is prescribed that whosoever presented a burnt-offering should lay his hand on its head, after he had come near the door of the tabernacle. This ceremony was not only a sign of consecration, but also of its being an atonement, … since it was substituted for the man, as is expressed in the words of Moses, "And it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him." (Ver. 4.) There is not, then, the least doubt but that they transferred their guilt and whatever penalties they had deserved to the victims, in order that they might be reconciled to God. … yet still not as though these brute animals availed in themselves unto expiation, except in so far as they were testimonies of the grace to be manifested by Christ. … Hence it follows that these symbols were useful only as they were exercises unto faith and repentance, so that the sinner might learn to fear God's wrath, and to seek pardon in Christ.
John Calvin, Commentaries, on 1:1–4; Calvin Translation Society (Edinburgh, 1843–1855); the text of the Free Use Bible API. The edition
The French reformer of Geneva, from whose teaching the Reformed and Presbyterian churches come.
Matthew Henry1662–1714English PresbyterianCommentary on the Whole Bible · on Leviticus 1:9"But to what purpose," would some say, "was this waste? Why should all this good meat, which might have been given to the poor, and have served their hungry families for food a great while, be burnt together to ashes?" … When it was burnt for the honour of God, in obedience to his command, and to signify spiritual blessings, it was really better bestowed, and better answered the end of its creation, than when it was used as food for man. We must never reckon that lost which is laid out for God. The burning of the sacrifice signified the sharp sufferings of Christ, and the devout affections with which, as a holy fire, Christians must offer up themselves their whole spirit, soul, and body, unto God. … This is said to be an offering of a sweet savour, or savour of rest, unto the Lord. The burning of flesh is unsavoury in itself; but this, as an act of obedience to a divine command, and a type of Christ, was well pleasing to God: he was reconciled to the offerer, and did himself take a complacency in that reconciliation.
"But to what purpose," would some say, "was this waste? Why should all this good meat, which might have been given to the poor, and have served their hungry families for food a great while, be burnt together to ashes?" … When it was burnt for the honour of God, in obedience to his command, and to signify spiritual blessings, it was really better bestowed, and better answered the end of its creation, than when it was used as food for man. We must never reckon that lost which is laid out for God. The burning of the sacrifice signified the sharp sufferings of Christ, and the devout affections with which, as a holy fire, Christians must offer up themselves their whole spirit, soul, and body, unto God. … This is said to be an offering of a sweet savour, or savour of rest, unto the Lord. The burning of flesh is unsavoury in itself; but this, as an act of obedience to a divine command, and a type of Christ, was well pleasing to God: he was reconciled to the offerer, and did himself take a complacency in that reconciliation.
Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, on 1:3–9; 1706–1714; the text of the Free Use Bible API. The edition
An English Presbyterian minister whose commentary on the whole Bible Protestants have read for three centuries.
Adam Clarkec. 1760–1832MethodistCommentary on the Holy Bible · on Leviticus 1:14–17All these must be without spot or blemish - the most perfect of their respective kinds, and be wholly consumed by fire. The Rich were to bring the most costly; the Poor, those of least price. Even in this requisition of justice how much mercy was mingled! If a man could not bring a bullock or a heifer, a goat or a sheep, let him bring a calf, a kid, or a lamb. If he could not bring any of these because of his poverty, let him bring a turtle-dove, or a young pigeon, (see Lev 5:7); … This brought down the benefits of the sacrificial service within the reach of the poorest of the poor; … But every man must bring something; the law stooped to the lowest circumstances of the poorest of the people, but every man must sacrifice, because every man had sinned. … Thanks be to God, the rich and the poor have equal access unto him through the Son of his love, and equal right to claim the benefits of the great sacrifice!
All these must be without spot or blemish - the most perfect of their respective kinds, and be wholly consumed by fire. The Rich were to bring the most costly; the Poor, those of least price. Even in this requisition of justice how much mercy was mingled! If a man could not bring a bullock or a heifer, a goat or a sheep, let him bring a calf, a kid, or a lamb. If he could not bring any of these because of his poverty, let him bring a turtle-dove, or a young pigeon, (see Lev 5:7); … This brought down the benefits of the sacrificial service within the reach of the poorest of the poor; … But every man must bring something; the law stooped to the lowest circumstances of the poorest of the people, but every man must sacrifice, because every man had sinned. … Thanks be to God, the rich and the poor have equal access unto him through the Son of his love, and equal right to claim the benefits of the great sacrifice!
Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible, on 1:16–17; 1810–1826; the text of the Free Use Bible API. The edition
A Methodist preacher and scholar from Ulster, whose commentary on the whole Bible took him nearly forty years.
Keil and Delitzsch1807–1888 and 1813–1890LutheranBiblical Commentary on the Old Testament · on Leviticus 1:4This ceremony was not a sign of the removal of something from his own power and possession, or the surrender and dedication of it to God, … nor a symbol of the imputation of sin, as Kurtz supposes: … but the symbol of a transfer of the feelings and intentions by which the offerer was actuated in presenting his sacrifice, whereby he set apart the animal as a sacrifice, representing his own person in one particular aspect. Now, so far as the burnt-offering expressed the intention of the offerer to consecrate his life and labour to the Lord, and his desire to obtain the expiation of the sin which still clung to all his works and desires, in order that they might become well-pleasing to God, he transferred the consciousness of his sinfulness to the victim by the laying on of hands, even in the case of the burnt-offering. But this was not all: he also transferred the desire to walk before God in holiness and righteousness, which he could not do without the grace of God.
This ceremony was not a sign of the removal of something from his own power and possession, or the surrender and dedication of it to God, … nor a symbol of the imputation of sin, as Kurtz supposes: … but the symbol of a transfer of the feelings and intentions by which the offerer was actuated in presenting his sacrifice, whereby he set apart the animal as a sacrifice, representing his own person in one particular aspect. Now, so far as the burnt-offering expressed the intention of the offerer to consecrate his life and labour to the Lord, and his desire to obtain the expiation of the sin which still clung to all his works and desires, in order that they might become well-pleasing to God, he transferred the consciousness of his sinfulness to the victim by the laying on of hands, even in the case of the burnt-offering. But this was not all: he also transferred the desire to walk before God in holiness and righteousness, which he could not do without the grace of God.
Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament, on 1:4; translated by James Martin and others (Edinburgh, 1866–1891); the text of the Free Use Bible API. The edition
Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch, two German Lutheran scholars of Hebrew whose commentary on the Old Testament is still read for its learning.
Leviticus 1
Leviticus 1:3–17, World English Bible
Leviticus 1 in the Bible · Told in the Story: Chapter 13, Offerings
What others have written
5 passages from writers of 2 traditions, in their own words, each with their dates and tradition. The site doesn’t say who is right: read them beside the verses. About these
Oldest first.
Josephus37–c. 100JewishAntiquities of the Jews · on Leviticus 1:3–13These sacrifices were of two sorts; of those sorts one was offered for private persons, and the other for the people in general; and they are done in two different ways. In the one case, what is slain is burnt, as a whole burnt-offering, whence that name is given to it; but the other is a thank-offering, and is designed for feasting those that sacrifice. … Suppose a private man offer a burnt-offering, he must slay either a bull, a lamb, or a kid of the goats, and the two latter of the first year, though of bulls he is permitted to sacrifice those of a greater age; but all burnt-offerings are to be of males. When they are slain, the priests sprinkle the blood round about the altar; they then cleanse the bodies, and divide them into parts, and salt them with salt, and lay them upon the altar, while the pieces of wood are piled one upon another, and the fire is burning; they next cleanse the feet of the sacrifices, and the inwards, in an accurate manner and so lay them to the rest to be purged by the fire, while the priests receive the hides.
Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Antiquities 3.9.1; translated by William Whiston (1737); the text of Project Gutenberg. The edition
A Jewish priest from Jerusalem who fought Rome in the war of 66–70 and afterwards wrote the history of his people for Greek readers.
John Calvin1509–1564ReformedCommentaries · on Leviticus 1:4In the second place, it is prescribed that whosoever presented a burnt-offering should lay his hand on its head, after he had come near the door of the tabernacle. This ceremony was not only a sign of consecration, but also of its being an atonement, … since it was substituted for the man, as is expressed in the words of Moses, "And it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him." (Ver. 4.) There is not, then, the least doubt but that they transferred their guilt and whatever penalties they had deserved to the victims, in order that they might be reconciled to God. … yet still not as though these brute animals availed in themselves unto expiation, except in so far as they were testimonies of the grace to be manifested by Christ. … Hence it follows that these symbols were useful only as they were exercises unto faith and repentance, so that the sinner might learn to fear God's wrath, and to seek pardon in Christ.
John Calvin, Commentaries, on 1:1–4; Calvin Translation Society (Edinburgh, 1843–1855); the text of the Free Use Bible API. The edition
The French reformer of Geneva, from whose teaching the Reformed and Presbyterian churches come.
Matthew Henry1662–1714English PresbyterianCommentary on the Whole Bible · on Leviticus 1:9"But to what purpose," would some say, "was this waste? Why should all this good meat, which might have been given to the poor, and have served their hungry families for food a great while, be burnt together to ashes?" … When it was burnt for the honour of God, in obedience to his command, and to signify spiritual blessings, it was really better bestowed, and better answered the end of its creation, than when it was used as food for man. We must never reckon that lost which is laid out for God. The burning of the sacrifice signified the sharp sufferings of Christ, and the devout affections with which, as a holy fire, Christians must offer up themselves their whole spirit, soul, and body, unto God. … This is said to be an offering of a sweet savour, or savour of rest, unto the Lord. The burning of flesh is unsavoury in itself; but this, as an act of obedience to a divine command, and a type of Christ, was well pleasing to God: he was reconciled to the offerer, and did himself take a complacency in that reconciliation.
Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, on 1:3–9; 1706–1714; the text of the Free Use Bible API. The edition
An English Presbyterian minister whose commentary on the whole Bible Protestants have read for three centuries.
Adam Clarkec. 1760–1832MethodistCommentary on the Holy Bible · on Leviticus 1:14–17All these must be without spot or blemish - the most perfect of their respective kinds, and be wholly consumed by fire. The Rich were to bring the most costly; the Poor, those of least price. Even in this requisition of justice how much mercy was mingled! If a man could not bring a bullock or a heifer, a goat or a sheep, let him bring a calf, a kid, or a lamb. If he could not bring any of these because of his poverty, let him bring a turtle-dove, or a young pigeon, (see Lev 5:7); … This brought down the benefits of the sacrificial service within the reach of the poorest of the poor; … But every man must bring something; the law stooped to the lowest circumstances of the poorest of the people, but every man must sacrifice, because every man had sinned. … Thanks be to God, the rich and the poor have equal access unto him through the Son of his love, and equal right to claim the benefits of the great sacrifice!
Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible, on 1:16–17; 1810–1826; the text of the Free Use Bible API. The edition
A Methodist preacher and scholar from Ulster, whose commentary on the whole Bible took him nearly forty years.
Keil and Delitzsch1807–1888 and 1813–1890LutheranBiblical Commentary on the Old Testament · on Leviticus 1:4This ceremony was not a sign of the removal of something from his own power and possession, or the surrender and dedication of it to God, … nor a symbol of the imputation of sin, as Kurtz supposes: … but the symbol of a transfer of the feelings and intentions by which the offerer was actuated in presenting his sacrifice, whereby he set apart the animal as a sacrifice, representing his own person in one particular aspect. Now, so far as the burnt-offering expressed the intention of the offerer to consecrate his life and labour to the Lord, and his desire to obtain the expiation of the sin which still clung to all his works and desires, in order that they might become well-pleasing to God, he transferred the consciousness of his sinfulness to the victim by the laying on of hands, even in the case of the burnt-offering. But this was not all: he also transferred the desire to walk before God in holiness and righteousness, which he could not do without the grace of God.
Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament, on 1:4; translated by James Martin and others (Edinburgh, 1866–1891); the text of the Free Use Bible API. The edition
Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch, two German Lutheran scholars of Hebrew whose commentary on the Old Testament is still read for its learning.