Chapter 16
Leviticus 16:1 - Moses resumes the calculation of time by indicating that the following was revealed after the death of Aaron's two sons (recorded in ch. 10).
Leviticus 16:2 - The way the English reads, one might think that Aaron was not supposed to come before the Mercy Seat ever. But that is not the way the Hebrew reads. It literally reads, "In [just] any season." In other words, Aaron is not at liberty to come in and out of the Holy of Holies. And the Lord will go on to prescribe just how Aaron may enter.
Leviticus 16:5 - The animals for sacrifice had to come from the "congregation of the sons of Israel" in general because this sacrifice was on behalf of the entire nation (vs. 16).
Leviticus 16:9-10 - There are many books and theologies written about these verses that I will not repeat here.
Leviticus 16:15 - "which is for the people." To see that in plain Hebrew is striking. The animal is killed for the people. It is interesting to note the preposition used to convey the idea "for the people." In Hebrew, it is a lamed, which means simply to or for. There are other words used to convey "on behalf of" or "on account of", but Moses did not use them.
Looking at the Septuagint (Greek translation of OT), can help us see what other scholars understood the Hebrew preposition to mean here. I found the preposition in Greek to be "peri" or "on account of," etc. This is actually very significant if you consider the prepositions used in the NT to describe Jesus' death on our behalf. Compare these OT prepositions used in reference the death of an animal to those used in the NT referring to the death of Jesus.
In the NT Greek, there is a preposition (uper) that has a special meaning "in place of" (among other things). In John 11:50, the high priest is giving a prophesy concerning Jesus: "It is better that one man should die on behalf of (uper) the people." Notice the connotation is that this man should trade places with the rest of the people.
I am seeing a difference in the prepositions used in these passages. In Leviticus, the animal is simply dying "for" the people. It cannot die in place of the people. Because "it is impossible for the blood of goats and bulls to take away sin" (Hebrews 10:4). These animals were never meant to die "in place of" (GK uper) the death people were to die. (Ezekiel 18:20, "The soul that sins shall die.") Only when Jesus came did He die in place of humanity, hence we see a preposition change. Thus, Jesus does not share any glory with animals. If animals could actually die the death in place of people, then it would elevate them and lower Jesus. However, animal sacrifices merely postponed the need for Jesus to come. As the Scripture says, "and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins" (Romans 3:24-25, ESV). There is a difference in the way God handled sin with animal sacrifices and Jesus. I think that difference is reflected even in the prepositions used.
This should also encourage us because of the specificity with which the Bible was written. Leviticus was written in the 1400's B.C. and Romans after the death of Christ. There is a difference of around 1500 years between the writing of these books and yet there is no conflict, even as minutely as prepositions used. Truly, God is the author of this book.
Why sprinkle the blood in front of the Mercy Seat? Perhaps it is because the priest would be standing on holy ground. So the blood was to be an intermediary between the soiled feet of the priest and the holy ground beneath him.
Leviticus 16:16-17 - Here we have the purification of a place: The tent of meeting, on account of the sins of the people that frequent the place. Everyone had to be out of the tent of meeting while the priest was making atonement for the place. This demonstrates that sins can infect a place as much as righteousness can saturate a place. There is a spiritual and material difference between places inhabited by the righteous and unrighteous. The spiritual and material are connected.
Leviticus 16:19 - The NASB omits a word present in the Hebrew. The rendering should be, "...and cleanse it and make it holy..." The last verb is omitted from NASB but retained in the KJV.
Leviticus 16:22 - What happened to the scape-goat? Did the Lord kill it in the wilderness? I don't think so. The other goat was killed, so there would be no need to kill this one. I think the purpose of this is to graphically illustrate the concept, "...and their sin I will remember no more" (Jeremiah 31:34, NASB).
Leviticus 16:26 - The word translated, "Scape-goat" in NASB is really two words in the Hebrew, as I hyphenated it above. The "scape" part of that word in Hebrew is interesting. For students of Hebrew, its stem is a reduplicated form of a word meaning "go away" or "be gone." It is not really used in the Bible in other contexts except in this chapter.
Leviticus 16:31 - I have not noticed this until now, but this verse says, "statute forever." The word for forever means "without stopping." So did the Lord really mean "forever" or "perpetual"? If it stopped at the cross, then it wouldn't be forever, would it? Or is there something else we are not understanding. If you read the plain words of Scripture, it sounds like this observance is not supposed to have an end. There are not many places where "statute forever" or "perpetual statute" is used. Mainly they are found in the Pentateuch concerning the Laws. Jesus said He came not to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it. Modern gentile Christians read that as, Jesus fulfilled the Old Law, and now it is no longer in force. Well, if the thing is no longer in force, then that would mean He abolished it, right? I think we, as gentile Believers, have more thinking to do on this subject.
Leviticus 16:34 - It could be that Jesus has/is fulfilling the role of priest here making atonement for the sons of Israel. Only, as the writer of Hebrews points out, He does not have to do it year after year, but only one time. Thus, this law of atonement has been appeased once and for all. It is not abolished, but Jesus has/is taking care of this requirement, acting as a priest on our behalf.
