(Leviticus 13:47 - 13:59)
"In regard to fabric and articles of clothing, whether of wool or linen, woven or knitted, or of leather, if the woven, knitted, or leather article has turned reddish or greenish with mould, it has been contaminated with tzaraath and must be shown to a priest. The priest should examine the affected article and store it in isolation for 7 days. On the seventh day, he should examine it again. If the mould has spread upon the woven or knitted cloth or piece of leather (irrespective of its use), then it is contaminated with tzaraath and is ritually impure. Whether the contaminated fabric be of wool or linen, woven or knitted, or of leather, it must be burned because it has tzaraath.
"However, if the priest examines it and finds that the mould on the woven or knitted clothing or article of leather has not spread, the priest should order the article washed and then stored in isolation for 7 more days. Afterwards, it will be reexamined by the priest. If the affected area is unchanged, even though the mould has not spread, it is still impure and must be burned, regardless of whether the contaminated area is on the inside or the outside of the fabric. But if, when the priest reexamines it, the mold has faded upon washing, then he should tear out the contaminated part of the woven or knitted fabric or leather article. If, after that, the mould reappears in the woven or knitted fabric or article of leather, it is obviously tsaraath and so the contaminated article must be burned. But if the mould has disappeared upon washing, then the woven or knitted clothing or article of leather should be washed again, at which time it will become ritually pure.
"These are the regulations concerning tzaraath in cloths of wool and linen, woven and knitted, and articles of leather, and the means by which the priest may determine whether they be ritually pure or impure."
Notes
1. Tzaraath in this context must refer to mould or mildew. It is curious, amusing even, that the Hebrews thought that mold and mildew that forms on clothes was the same thing as a skin disease and needed to be treated in the same manner. Odd that someone would find a spot of mildew on their robe and rush to have a priest examine it. Consider a modern person finding mildew on an old coat: Would he bring it to church and have the pastor look at it for fear that the garment might be ritually impure? One would think a person would simply brush off the mildew, wash and scrub the garment and think no more of it, at least have no thought that the matter would have any possible religious significance. Things were different in the ancient Hebraic world!
2. One gains the impression that, unlike their neighbors the Egyptians or, in a later period, the Greeks, the ancient Hebrews were not one for the daily bath or shower, nor were they disposed to wash their clothes frequently. When they bathed or washed their clothes, it seems as if it is only for a special occasion. This may be reason the may have suffered from skin diseases and found moulds and mildew on their clothes.
3. Fabrics that may be contaminated with tzaraath include wool and linen, as well as leather, but not cotton, which was probably unfamiliar to the Hebrews and, therefore, unlikely to have been worn by them. Cotton cultivation and cotton textiles date back to remote antiquity, but mostly in India, China, and Mexico. The Greeks were ignorant of cotton until the conquests of Alexander the Great in India. Dyed textiles and wool from animals other than sheep were traditionally not thought to be susceptible to contamination by tzaraath.
Saturday, May 31, 2014
Treatment of Tzaraath of the Skin
(Leviticus 13:1 - 13:46)
Jehovah said this to Moses and Aaron:
"When anyone has on his skin a swelling, an eruption, or a shiny spot that might be a symptom of tzaraath, that person should be brought to see Aaron or any of his successors as priests. The priest should examine the patient's skin, and if body hair in the affected area has turned white and the disease seems more than skin deep, then it is tzaraath. After the examination, the priest should declare the person ritually impure. However, if the skin is only discolored, the body hair in the area has not turned white, and the disease seems to have affected only the surface of the skin, then the priest should confine the person to his home for 7 days. If, after examining him on the seventh day, the priest finds that the sore is unchanged and has not spread, then the priest should have him confined for another 7 days. On the seventh day the priest should make another examination and, finding the sore has faded and has not spread, the priest may declare the patient ritually pure -- it was only a skin rash. The patient's clothes should be washed and, after that, he will be ritually pure. If, after the examination by the priest and the declaration that he is ritually pure, running sores reappear, the patient must return to the priest for another examination. If the priest concludes that the sores have spread, he will pronounce the patient ritually impure -- it is indeed a case of tzaraath.
"When anyone is afflicted with tzaraath, he should be brought before a priest. The priest will make an examination, and, if the skin is white and swelling, if the body hair around it has turned white, and if there is an open sore on the skin, then it is tzaraath, and the priest should declare the person ritually impure. In such cases, a confinement is unnecessary since it is obvious the person is infected with tzaraath. In the case of the disease affecting the skin of the entire body, from head to toe, the priest must examine the patient and finding, as far as he can tell, that the disease has covered his entire body, he may declare him ritually pure, for the skin is uniformly white. If, however, open sores appear, then the infected person must be declared ritually impure. The priest must make this declaration as soon as sores are detected, for sores are a symptom of tzaraath. If the sores heal and the area turns white again like the rest of the skin, then the infected person must return to the priest for another examination. If he finds the affected areas have indeed turned white, then he may declare the patient ritually pure -- and he will thus be pure.
"When a person has a boil on the skin and after it has healed, there is, in the same area, a whitish swelling or a pink spot, it should be shown to the priest, who should make an examination. If the infection seems more than skin deep and the body hair in the area has turned white, then the priest should declare the person ritually impure, for tzaraath has broken out where the boil was. But if the priest exams it and finds that the hair in the area is not white, that the infection seems no deeper than the skin and is in the process of healing, then he should confine the patient for 7 days. If, during this time, the skin infection spreads, the priest should declare the patient ritually impure, for it is tzaraath. If, on the other hand, the infection is unchanged and has not spread, it is merely a scar from the boil, and the priest should declare the person pure.
"If someone has a burn on his body and white or pink spot appears in the sores of the burn, then a priest should examine it. If he finds that body hair in the area has turned white and that the infection seems more than skin deep, then tzaraath has broken out in the burn. The priest must pronounce the person ritually impure, for this is tzaraath. But if when the priest examines it, body hair in the area has not turned white and the infection does not seem more than skin deep, then he should confine the patient to his home for 7 days. The priest should examine him on the seventh day, and if the infection has spread, he should declare the patient ritually impure, for he is afflicted with tzaraath. But if the spot is unchanged, has not spread, but is healing, then it is merely the swelling from the burn, the priest should pronounce him pure, for it is only a burn scar.
"If a man or woman has a sore on the head or in the beard, the priest should examine it. If it seems to be more than skin deep and there is fine, yellow hair in it, then the priest must declare the person ritually impure. It is tzaraath of the head or beard. If the priest examines the infection and it appears to be only skin deep, with no black hair in it, the priest should confine the person with the sore for 7 days. On the seventh day the priest should examine the sore, and if it has not spread, if there is no yellow hair in it and it does not seem to be more than skin deep, then the man may shave around the sore, leaving the sore unshaven. The priest should confine the person with the sore for another 7 days. On the seventh day the priest should reexamine the sore, and if it has not spread and seems no more than skin deep, then he should pronounce the person ritually pure. The affected person should then wash his clothes, and he will then be purified. However, if the sore begins to spread after the person has been declared pure, then the priest must conduct another examination. If he finds that the sore has indeed spread, he need not search for yellow hair; the infected person is ritually impure. But if the color of the sore has not changed and black hair has grown in it, the sore has healed; the person is thus ritually pure, and the priest should declare him so.
"If a man or a woman has white spots on their skin, a priest should examine them. If they are dull, pale white, it is only a skin rash; the person remains pure.
"If a man loses the hair on his head, he may be bald, but he remains ritually pure. If he loses hair from his temples, he has a receding hairline, but he remains pure. However, if he has a pink sore on his pate or crown, it is tzaraath breaking out there. The priest should examine him, and if the sore on the pate or crown is pink, resembling an outbreak of tzaraath, then the man is diseased and ritually impure. Because of the sore on his head the priest must declare him to be impure.
"Those afflicted with tzaraath must wear ragged clothes and leave their hair unkempt. They must cover the lower part of their faces, and cry out, "Impure! Impure!" As long as they have the disease, they will remain ritually impure. And they must live by themselves in a place outside of camp."
Notes
1. Sometimes the best translation is not to translate, and I have stuck with the original Hebrew word tzaraath (spelled variously). It refers to a range of skin diseases and afflictions -- but not only that, the term is also used to refer to mold and mildew that may appear on clothing or in dwellings. It is traditionally translated as leprosy, but this is patently inaccurate. For one thing, clothes and houses don't become afflicted with leprosy, and most of the skin complaints here described do not suggest leprosy or its symptoms at all. (Most sound like psoriasis.) Leprosy, or Hansen's disease, was, in fact, rare, in Old Testament times, even if, by the time of Jesus, it was common and a serious health problem. It must be remembered that tzaraath is not being dealt with in a medical context. The only issue here is whether a person is ritually pure or impure. Serious breaking of the skin is sufficient to render one impure. And any skin disease sufficient to render one ritually impure is termed tzaraath.
2. It must be noted that many ancient historians believed that the Israelites led by Moses were expelled from Egypt because they were diseased. Perhaps there was a widespread occurrence of skin diseases among them, occasioning this emphasis on tzaraath.
3. The confinement of those suspected of having tzaraath is merely to determine the progression of the infection. It is not a quarantine, as we might imagine, to protect others from a contagious disease. The ancients, after all, knew nothing about the origin or transmission of disease. (Lest we be too smug in our knowledge, we should remember that the germ theory was not universally accepted until the end of the 19th Century.) The isolation of those suffering from tzaraath, the popular conception of the "leper," was necessitated since those who are more than temporarily impure cannot take an active part in Hebrew society.
4. The reference to shaving is interesting. One imagines the ancient Hebrews as being uniformly bearded, since shaving the beard will be prohibited (later in Leviticus). To shave they probably would have used a copper razor, which was developed as early as 3000 B.C.
Jehovah said this to Moses and Aaron:
"When anyone has on his skin a swelling, an eruption, or a shiny spot that might be a symptom of tzaraath, that person should be brought to see Aaron or any of his successors as priests. The priest should examine the patient's skin, and if body hair in the affected area has turned white and the disease seems more than skin deep, then it is tzaraath. After the examination, the priest should declare the person ritually impure. However, if the skin is only discolored, the body hair in the area has not turned white, and the disease seems to have affected only the surface of the skin, then the priest should confine the person to his home for 7 days. If, after examining him on the seventh day, the priest finds that the sore is unchanged and has not spread, then the priest should have him confined for another 7 days. On the seventh day the priest should make another examination and, finding the sore has faded and has not spread, the priest may declare the patient ritually pure -- it was only a skin rash. The patient's clothes should be washed and, after that, he will be ritually pure. If, after the examination by the priest and the declaration that he is ritually pure, running sores reappear, the patient must return to the priest for another examination. If the priest concludes that the sores have spread, he will pronounce the patient ritually impure -- it is indeed a case of tzaraath.
"When anyone is afflicted with tzaraath, he should be brought before a priest. The priest will make an examination, and, if the skin is white and swelling, if the body hair around it has turned white, and if there is an open sore on the skin, then it is tzaraath, and the priest should declare the person ritually impure. In such cases, a confinement is unnecessary since it is obvious the person is infected with tzaraath. In the case of the disease affecting the skin of the entire body, from head to toe, the priest must examine the patient and finding, as far as he can tell, that the disease has covered his entire body, he may declare him ritually pure, for the skin is uniformly white. If, however, open sores appear, then the infected person must be declared ritually impure. The priest must make this declaration as soon as sores are detected, for sores are a symptom of tzaraath. If the sores heal and the area turns white again like the rest of the skin, then the infected person must return to the priest for another examination. If he finds the affected areas have indeed turned white, then he may declare the patient ritually pure -- and he will thus be pure.
"When a person has a boil on the skin and after it has healed, there is, in the same area, a whitish swelling or a pink spot, it should be shown to the priest, who should make an examination. If the infection seems more than skin deep and the body hair in the area has turned white, then the priest should declare the person ritually impure, for tzaraath has broken out where the boil was. But if the priest exams it and finds that the hair in the area is not white, that the infection seems no deeper than the skin and is in the process of healing, then he should confine the patient for 7 days. If, during this time, the skin infection spreads, the priest should declare the patient ritually impure, for it is tzaraath. If, on the other hand, the infection is unchanged and has not spread, it is merely a scar from the boil, and the priest should declare the person pure.
"If someone has a burn on his body and white or pink spot appears in the sores of the burn, then a priest should examine it. If he finds that body hair in the area has turned white and that the infection seems more than skin deep, then tzaraath has broken out in the burn. The priest must pronounce the person ritually impure, for this is tzaraath. But if when the priest examines it, body hair in the area has not turned white and the infection does not seem more than skin deep, then he should confine the patient to his home for 7 days. The priest should examine him on the seventh day, and if the infection has spread, he should declare the patient ritually impure, for he is afflicted with tzaraath. But if the spot is unchanged, has not spread, but is healing, then it is merely the swelling from the burn, the priest should pronounce him pure, for it is only a burn scar.
"If a man or woman has a sore on the head or in the beard, the priest should examine it. If it seems to be more than skin deep and there is fine, yellow hair in it, then the priest must declare the person ritually impure. It is tzaraath of the head or beard. If the priest examines the infection and it appears to be only skin deep, with no black hair in it, the priest should confine the person with the sore for 7 days. On the seventh day the priest should examine the sore, and if it has not spread, if there is no yellow hair in it and it does not seem to be more than skin deep, then the man may shave around the sore, leaving the sore unshaven. The priest should confine the person with the sore for another 7 days. On the seventh day the priest should reexamine the sore, and if it has not spread and seems no more than skin deep, then he should pronounce the person ritually pure. The affected person should then wash his clothes, and he will then be purified. However, if the sore begins to spread after the person has been declared pure, then the priest must conduct another examination. If he finds that the sore has indeed spread, he need not search for yellow hair; the infected person is ritually impure. But if the color of the sore has not changed and black hair has grown in it, the sore has healed; the person is thus ritually pure, and the priest should declare him so.
"If a man or a woman has white spots on their skin, a priest should examine them. If they are dull, pale white, it is only a skin rash; the person remains pure.
"If a man loses the hair on his head, he may be bald, but he remains ritually pure. If he loses hair from his temples, he has a receding hairline, but he remains pure. However, if he has a pink sore on his pate or crown, it is tzaraath breaking out there. The priest should examine him, and if the sore on the pate or crown is pink, resembling an outbreak of tzaraath, then the man is diseased and ritually impure. Because of the sore on his head the priest must declare him to be impure.
"Those afflicted with tzaraath must wear ragged clothes and leave their hair unkempt. They must cover the lower part of their faces, and cry out, "Impure! Impure!" As long as they have the disease, they will remain ritually impure. And they must live by themselves in a place outside of camp."
Notes
1. Sometimes the best translation is not to translate, and I have stuck with the original Hebrew word tzaraath (spelled variously). It refers to a range of skin diseases and afflictions -- but not only that, the term is also used to refer to mold and mildew that may appear on clothing or in dwellings. It is traditionally translated as leprosy, but this is patently inaccurate. For one thing, clothes and houses don't become afflicted with leprosy, and most of the skin complaints here described do not suggest leprosy or its symptoms at all. (Most sound like psoriasis.) Leprosy, or Hansen's disease, was, in fact, rare, in Old Testament times, even if, by the time of Jesus, it was common and a serious health problem. It must be remembered that tzaraath is not being dealt with in a medical context. The only issue here is whether a person is ritually pure or impure. Serious breaking of the skin is sufficient to render one impure. And any skin disease sufficient to render one ritually impure is termed tzaraath.
2. It must be noted that many ancient historians believed that the Israelites led by Moses were expelled from Egypt because they were diseased. Perhaps there was a widespread occurrence of skin diseases among them, occasioning this emphasis on tzaraath.
3. The confinement of those suspected of having tzaraath is merely to determine the progression of the infection. It is not a quarantine, as we might imagine, to protect others from a contagious disease. The ancients, after all, knew nothing about the origin or transmission of disease. (Lest we be too smug in our knowledge, we should remember that the germ theory was not universally accepted until the end of the 19th Century.) The isolation of those suffering from tzaraath, the popular conception of the "leper," was necessitated since those who are more than temporarily impure cannot take an active part in Hebrew society.
4. The reference to shaving is interesting. One imagines the ancient Hebrews as being uniformly bearded, since shaving the beard will be prohibited (later in Leviticus). To shave they probably would have used a copper razor, which was developed as early as 3000 B.C.
Purification of Women After Childbirth
(Leviticus 12:1 - 12:8)
Jehovah told Moses to give the Israelites the following instructions: "A woman who becomes pregnant and then gives birth to a son will be ritually impure for a period of 7 days, just as she is impure while she is menstruating. On the 8th day, the baby boy must be circumcised, that is, the foreskin covering the head of the penis is to be cut off. After that, the mother must wait 33 days until she is purified from the blood letting of childbirth. During this time she must not have contact with anything that is deemed holy or enter the Tabernacle Sanctuary.
"If the woman gives birth to a daughter, the mother will be ritually impure for a period of two weeks, just as she is impure while she is menstruating. After 66 days she will be purified from the bleeding of childbirth.
"Whether the birth be of a son or a daughter, when the time of purification is over, the mother must bring to the priest at the entrance to the Tabernacle a yearling lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or turtledove for a sin offering. The priest will present it to Jehovah to make atonement on her behalf, and thereafter she will purified from the bleeding of childbirth. These regulations apply to a woman after the birth of either a son or a daughter.
"If, however, a woman cannot afford to bring a lamb for sacrifice, she may offer two young pigeons or turtledoves instead. One will be for the burnt offering and the other for the sin offering. The priest will make atonement on her behalf and thenceforth she will be ritually pure."
Notes
1. It is not surprising that childbirth would make a woman ritually impure, although it is ironic that bringing forth new life, a sublime event to celebrate, results only, it seems, in making the mother impure. The length of time during which the mother is impure is 7 days. Yet, confusingly, she is not pure again until a period of 33 days (for a boy child) or 66 days (for a girl child) have passed. She must then make sacrifices, burnt offerings and sin offerings, to reclaim her purity. If she does not do so, will she remain forever impure? Or are the sacrifices required only to provide employment for the priests?
2. The difference in purification times, 33 and 66 days, between a male and female birth is unexplained. Does it have to do with the fact that the boy baby is circumcised? Or is it due to the relative status of men and women, a man being worth twice a woman? Most ancient and even many modern societies strongly favor the birth of males, although in Hebrew society a daughter at least had monetary value: she could be sold to her husband for a bride price.
3. Male circumcision, although a condition of Jehovah’s patronage, was not unique to the Hebrews. It was customarily practiced by most Semitic and Hamitic peoples from ancient times. Greeks and Romans, however, eschewed the practice. There are certain health benefits to circumcision, (although obvious downsides if one is to be regularly unclothed). Adherence to the custom is uneven and opinion divided as to its virtues, but a third of the male population of earth is currently circumcised.
Jehovah told Moses to give the Israelites the following instructions: "A woman who becomes pregnant and then gives birth to a son will be ritually impure for a period of 7 days, just as she is impure while she is menstruating. On the 8th day, the baby boy must be circumcised, that is, the foreskin covering the head of the penis is to be cut off. After that, the mother must wait 33 days until she is purified from the blood letting of childbirth. During this time she must not have contact with anything that is deemed holy or enter the Tabernacle Sanctuary.
"If the woman gives birth to a daughter, the mother will be ritually impure for a period of two weeks, just as she is impure while she is menstruating. After 66 days she will be purified from the bleeding of childbirth.
"Whether the birth be of a son or a daughter, when the time of purification is over, the mother must bring to the priest at the entrance to the Tabernacle a yearling lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or turtledove for a sin offering. The priest will present it to Jehovah to make atonement on her behalf, and thereafter she will purified from the bleeding of childbirth. These regulations apply to a woman after the birth of either a son or a daughter.
"If, however, a woman cannot afford to bring a lamb for sacrifice, she may offer two young pigeons or turtledoves instead. One will be for the burnt offering and the other for the sin offering. The priest will make atonement on her behalf and thenceforth she will be ritually pure."
Notes
1. It is not surprising that childbirth would make a woman ritually impure, although it is ironic that bringing forth new life, a sublime event to celebrate, results only, it seems, in making the mother impure. The length of time during which the mother is impure is 7 days. Yet, confusingly, she is not pure again until a period of 33 days (for a boy child) or 66 days (for a girl child) have passed. She must then make sacrifices, burnt offerings and sin offerings, to reclaim her purity. If she does not do so, will she remain forever impure? Or are the sacrifices required only to provide employment for the priests?
2. The difference in purification times, 33 and 66 days, between a male and female birth is unexplained. Does it have to do with the fact that the boy baby is circumcised? Or is it due to the relative status of men and women, a man being worth twice a woman? Most ancient and even many modern societies strongly favor the birth of males, although in Hebrew society a daughter at least had monetary value: she could be sold to her husband for a bride price.
3. Male circumcision, although a condition of Jehovah’s patronage, was not unique to the Hebrews. It was customarily practiced by most Semitic and Hamitic peoples from ancient times. Greeks and Romans, however, eschewed the practice. There are certain health benefits to circumcision, (although obvious downsides if one is to be regularly unclothed). Adherence to the custom is uneven and opinion divided as to its virtues, but a third of the male population of earth is currently circumcised.
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
Ritually Pure and Impure Creatures
(Leviticus 11:1 -11:47)
Jehovah told Moses and Aaron to instruct the Israelite community, "In regard to land animals, these are the ones that may be used for food: You may eat the meat of any animal that has both a split hoof and chews the cud, but not those that have a split hoof or chews the cud. For instance, the camel chews the cud, but does not have a split hoof; therefore, it is ritually impure. The hyrax chews the cud, but does not have a split hoof; it is impure. The rabbit chews the cud, but does not have a split hoof, so it, too, is ritually impure. The pig, though it has an evenly split hoof, does not chew the cud, and is, therefore, impure. You must not eat the meat or touch the carcasses of these animals, for to you they are ritually impure.
"In regard to marine animals, both of sea and stream, these are the ones that may be used as food: Any salt or fresh water creature that has both fins and scales may be eaten. But you must not eat any marine animal that does not have both fins and scales; whether they be small creatures that live in shallow water or creatures of the deep, they are abhorrent to you and must remain so. You must never eat their meat or touch their carcasses, for marine creatures without both fins and scales are ritually impure to you.
"The birds that are ritually impure and should not be eaten are: vultures, eagles, hawks, kites, ospreys, herons, ravens, seagulls, owls, storks, pelicans, herons, hoopoes, and also the bat.
"All flying insects that crawl on the ground are abhorrent to you and should not be eaten. An exception to these are winged insects that crawl on the ground, but have jointed legs that allow them to jump. Of these you may eat any variety of grasshopper, katydid, or cricket. Other winged insects that crawl on the ground are abhorrent to you. Such creatures will make you ritually impure so that if you have contact with their dead bodies you will remain impure until evening. If you pick up their dead bodies, you must wash your cloths afterwards, and you will remain impure until evening.
"Animals that do not have a completely divided hoof or do not chew the cud are ritually impure, and anyone having contact with their carcasses will be rendered impure until evening. Of land animals, those that walk on their paws are impure, and anyone having contact with their carcasses will remain impure until evening. If you pick up their carcasses, you must wash your cloths afterwards, and you will remain impure until evening, for to you these animals are ritually impure.
"Of land creatures, these are ritually impure to you: weasels, rats and mice, lizards, skinks, and geckos, crocodiles and chameleons. Anyone who touches the carcasses of these ritually impure land animals will be impure until evening.
“Anything that may have contact with the dead bodies of ritually impure creatures will be rendered ritually impure, whether it be an article of wood, cloth, leather, or burlap. Regardless of its use, the article should be washed in water. Although it will remain impure until evening, after that it will be ritually pure and may be reused. If the impure carcass falls into an earthenware vessel, the container will be rendered impure and must be smashed. Anything in the vessel is impure. If liquid from the vessel spills on any food, that food will become impure, and any beverage the vessel may contain will also be impure. Any object that comes into contact with the carcass of such an animal will be made impure. If this happens to be an earthen oven or a cooking pot, it should be broken -- it is ritually impure and must always be regarded by you as such. If, however, it is a spring or cistern, the water will remain ritually pure, although anyone who has contact with the carcass will still be rendered impure. If the carcass comes into contact with crop seeds, the seeds will still be pure unless they are wet, in which case they will become impure.
“If an animal that you are permitted to eat dies naturally and you have contact with its carcass, then you will be impure until evening. If you eat its meat or carry away its carcass, you must wash your clothes and you will remain ritually impure until evening.
“Crawling bugs are abhorrent and should never be eaten. Whether they slither on their bellies, have four feet, or are many legged, all such animals are abhorrent. Do not eat them or defile yourself by touching them. Do not make yourself ritually impure because of them.
"I am your god Jehovah. Sanctify yourself. Be holy, as I am. Don't defile yourself with these creepy, crawly things! I am Jehovah, who brought you out of Egypt in order that I might be your god. Therefore, you must be holy, because I am holy.
"These are my instructions concerning animals and birds, and all the creatures that swim in the sea or crawl on the ground. By them you may distinguish between those that are ritually pure and those that are impure, what animals may be eaten and what animals may not."
Notes
1. The animals reserved for human consumption, at least for the tribe of Israel, seem to be limited to livestock, cattle, sheep, and goats. Camels and pigs would have been wild animals and not, at that time, domesticated ones. It is likely that health reasons may have been a factor, perhaps a primary one in the selection. Many wild animals in ancient times may have known as carriers of parasites and vectors of human diseases. --- The Jehovah of Eden meant man to be a vegetarian. The Jehovah of Noah allowed man to be a meat eater. Now, the Jehovah of Moses sets up a regimen of what may be eaten and what must not be eaten.
2. Rabbits are technically not ruminants, that is, they do not chew the cud, as the biblical authors believed. They do rechew regurgitated food as well as eating some of their feces. Hyraxes, rodent-like animals one to two feet in length and indigenous to Africa and the Middle East, are not actually ruminants either, but often manifest chewing behavior that resembles chewing the cud.
3. Marine creatures acceptable for the dinner table seem to be limited to fish, no crabs or lobsters, shrimp, octopus. One would think that large fish such as sharks, whose skin is not scaly, and marine mammals such as whales and dolphins and seals would be off the menu as well.
4. The list of birds not to be eaten is considerable, but the exact species mentioned cannot be positively identified from the Hebrew. In fact, every Bible translation seems to have a different list of birds, sometimes including avian species not indigenous to the Middle East and those of which the ancient Hebrews would have had no knowledge. I have taken the liberty of condensing the list to include the most probable types of birds, which are all raptors or carrion eaters. It seems likely that Jehovah regarded these birds to be ritually impure because they ate animals that were impure. (Curious that the bat is included among the birds. They must have regarded it as a furry bird rather than, as we do, a flying mammal.)
5. Insects are generally not part of the approved diet, but ones that jump are, grasshoppers, katydids, and crickets. (I have used the word "grasshopper," most commonly used by Americans instead of "locust" which, though very biblical, is seldom used today. Grasshopper is, in fact a more general term embracing creatures of the Acrididae and Tettigoniidae families. Locusts, short-horned grasshoppers, are of the Acrididae family and are generally what we mean when we say “grasshopper.” Arboreal bush crickets, or katydids, belong to the Tettigoniidae family, and are sometimes termed long-horned grasshoppers. To make matters more confusing, cicadas, of the Cicadidae family, an entire different sort of insect, are often called locusts, but it is unlikely that they are referred to here.)
6. The abhorrent small, crawling or swarming creatures are not specifically named, but I assume the authors are talking about what we call bugs, which includes insects, spiders, worms, centipedes, etc. It might, however, include small mammals, since it mentions four-footed creatures. These, such as mice, have already been included, though, in the paragraph concerning land animals.
7. After being exposed to an impure animal, one is impure until evening, but there is no assertion that the impurity lasts beyond that time, even if one doesn't do as he is supposed to, such as wash his clothes. It must be remembered that the day, according to the Hebrews, begins at sundown, so evening is not, as we perceive it, the end of the day, but rather its beginning.
8. The impression given is that Jehovah and the Israelites are hardly animal lovers or nature worshipers. They seem to be the antithesis of the Egyptians who had a harmonious relationship with the wildlife about them, gave their gods animal heads, and, from the earliest times, kept animals as pets and companions. There is no reference here to pets, perhaps because the Hebrews had none, only livestock. But one ponders the compelling question, would Fido’s slobbering on you make you impure until sundown? And if your pet cat drank from your water cup, would that render the water ritually impure?
9. Ritual purity, incomprehensible to moderns and not really explainable in a material sense, is an important metaphysical concept that pervades most of Hebrew religious and social life. It is not unique to the Jewish religion, but is common in ancient and primitive religions.
Jehovah told Moses and Aaron to instruct the Israelite community, "In regard to land animals, these are the ones that may be used for food: You may eat the meat of any animal that has both a split hoof and chews the cud, but not those that have a split hoof or chews the cud. For instance, the camel chews the cud, but does not have a split hoof; therefore, it is ritually impure. The hyrax chews the cud, but does not have a split hoof; it is impure. The rabbit chews the cud, but does not have a split hoof, so it, too, is ritually impure. The pig, though it has an evenly split hoof, does not chew the cud, and is, therefore, impure. You must not eat the meat or touch the carcasses of these animals, for to you they are ritually impure.
"In regard to marine animals, both of sea and stream, these are the ones that may be used as food: Any salt or fresh water creature that has both fins and scales may be eaten. But you must not eat any marine animal that does not have both fins and scales; whether they be small creatures that live in shallow water or creatures of the deep, they are abhorrent to you and must remain so. You must never eat their meat or touch their carcasses, for marine creatures without both fins and scales are ritually impure to you.
"The birds that are ritually impure and should not be eaten are: vultures, eagles, hawks, kites, ospreys, herons, ravens, seagulls, owls, storks, pelicans, herons, hoopoes, and also the bat.
"All flying insects that crawl on the ground are abhorrent to you and should not be eaten. An exception to these are winged insects that crawl on the ground, but have jointed legs that allow them to jump. Of these you may eat any variety of grasshopper, katydid, or cricket. Other winged insects that crawl on the ground are abhorrent to you. Such creatures will make you ritually impure so that if you have contact with their dead bodies you will remain impure until evening. If you pick up their dead bodies, you must wash your cloths afterwards, and you will remain impure until evening.
"Animals that do not have a completely divided hoof or do not chew the cud are ritually impure, and anyone having contact with their carcasses will be rendered impure until evening. Of land animals, those that walk on their paws are impure, and anyone having contact with their carcasses will remain impure until evening. If you pick up their carcasses, you must wash your cloths afterwards, and you will remain impure until evening, for to you these animals are ritually impure.
"Of land creatures, these are ritually impure to you: weasels, rats and mice, lizards, skinks, and geckos, crocodiles and chameleons. Anyone who touches the carcasses of these ritually impure land animals will be impure until evening.
“Anything that may have contact with the dead bodies of ritually impure creatures will be rendered ritually impure, whether it be an article of wood, cloth, leather, or burlap. Regardless of its use, the article should be washed in water. Although it will remain impure until evening, after that it will be ritually pure and may be reused. If the impure carcass falls into an earthenware vessel, the container will be rendered impure and must be smashed. Anything in the vessel is impure. If liquid from the vessel spills on any food, that food will become impure, and any beverage the vessel may contain will also be impure. Any object that comes into contact with the carcass of such an animal will be made impure. If this happens to be an earthen oven or a cooking pot, it should be broken -- it is ritually impure and must always be regarded by you as such. If, however, it is a spring or cistern, the water will remain ritually pure, although anyone who has contact with the carcass will still be rendered impure. If the carcass comes into contact with crop seeds, the seeds will still be pure unless they are wet, in which case they will become impure.
“If an animal that you are permitted to eat dies naturally and you have contact with its carcass, then you will be impure until evening. If you eat its meat or carry away its carcass, you must wash your clothes and you will remain ritually impure until evening.
“Crawling bugs are abhorrent and should never be eaten. Whether they slither on their bellies, have four feet, or are many legged, all such animals are abhorrent. Do not eat them or defile yourself by touching them. Do not make yourself ritually impure because of them.
"I am your god Jehovah. Sanctify yourself. Be holy, as I am. Don't defile yourself with these creepy, crawly things! I am Jehovah, who brought you out of Egypt in order that I might be your god. Therefore, you must be holy, because I am holy.
"These are my instructions concerning animals and birds, and all the creatures that swim in the sea or crawl on the ground. By them you may distinguish between those that are ritually pure and those that are impure, what animals may be eaten and what animals may not."
Notes
1. The animals reserved for human consumption, at least for the tribe of Israel, seem to be limited to livestock, cattle, sheep, and goats. Camels and pigs would have been wild animals and not, at that time, domesticated ones. It is likely that health reasons may have been a factor, perhaps a primary one in the selection. Many wild animals in ancient times may have known as carriers of parasites and vectors of human diseases. --- The Jehovah of Eden meant man to be a vegetarian. The Jehovah of Noah allowed man to be a meat eater. Now, the Jehovah of Moses sets up a regimen of what may be eaten and what must not be eaten.
2. Rabbits are technically not ruminants, that is, they do not chew the cud, as the biblical authors believed. They do rechew regurgitated food as well as eating some of their feces. Hyraxes, rodent-like animals one to two feet in length and indigenous to Africa and the Middle East, are not actually ruminants either, but often manifest chewing behavior that resembles chewing the cud.
3. Marine creatures acceptable for the dinner table seem to be limited to fish, no crabs or lobsters, shrimp, octopus. One would think that large fish such as sharks, whose skin is not scaly, and marine mammals such as whales and dolphins and seals would be off the menu as well.
4. The list of birds not to be eaten is considerable, but the exact species mentioned cannot be positively identified from the Hebrew. In fact, every Bible translation seems to have a different list of birds, sometimes including avian species not indigenous to the Middle East and those of which the ancient Hebrews would have had no knowledge. I have taken the liberty of condensing the list to include the most probable types of birds, which are all raptors or carrion eaters. It seems likely that Jehovah regarded these birds to be ritually impure because they ate animals that were impure. (Curious that the bat is included among the birds. They must have regarded it as a furry bird rather than, as we do, a flying mammal.)
5. Insects are generally not part of the approved diet, but ones that jump are, grasshoppers, katydids, and crickets. (I have used the word "grasshopper," most commonly used by Americans instead of "locust" which, though very biblical, is seldom used today. Grasshopper is, in fact a more general term embracing creatures of the Acrididae and Tettigoniidae families. Locusts, short-horned grasshoppers, are of the Acrididae family and are generally what we mean when we say “grasshopper.” Arboreal bush crickets, or katydids, belong to the Tettigoniidae family, and are sometimes termed long-horned grasshoppers. To make matters more confusing, cicadas, of the Cicadidae family, an entire different sort of insect, are often called locusts, but it is unlikely that they are referred to here.)
6. The abhorrent small, crawling or swarming creatures are not specifically named, but I assume the authors are talking about what we call bugs, which includes insects, spiders, worms, centipedes, etc. It might, however, include small mammals, since it mentions four-footed creatures. These, such as mice, have already been included, though, in the paragraph concerning land animals.
7. After being exposed to an impure animal, one is impure until evening, but there is no assertion that the impurity lasts beyond that time, even if one doesn't do as he is supposed to, such as wash his clothes. It must be remembered that the day, according to the Hebrews, begins at sundown, so evening is not, as we perceive it, the end of the day, but rather its beginning.
8. The impression given is that Jehovah and the Israelites are hardly animal lovers or nature worshipers. They seem to be the antithesis of the Egyptians who had a harmonious relationship with the wildlife about them, gave their gods animal heads, and, from the earliest times, kept animals as pets and companions. There is no reference here to pets, perhaps because the Hebrews had none, only livestock. But one ponders the compelling question, would Fido’s slobbering on you make you impure until sundown? And if your pet cat drank from your water cup, would that render the water ritually impure?
9. Ritual purity, incomprehensible to moderns and not really explainable in a material sense, is an important metaphysical concept that pervades most of Hebrew religious and social life. It is not unique to the Jewish religion, but is common in ancient and primitive religions.
Sunday, May 4, 2014
Aaron's Sons
(Leviticus 10:1 - 10:20)
Aaron's sons, Nadab and Abihu, started a fire in their censers, sprinkled incense into them, and burned it -- but with a fire from an unconsecrated source, contrary what was commanded by Jehovah. Consequently, a flame roared up from the Incense Altar and set them afire so that they perished in front of the Inner Sanctum.
Moses told Aaron, "This is what Jehovah meant when he said, 'Those who minister to me will respect my divinity; before the entire people I will be honored.’”
Aaron had nothing to say in response.
Moses summoned Aaron's cousins, Mishael and Elzaphan, the sons of his uncle Uzziel, and told them, "Come here and carry the bodies of your cousins out of the Sanctum to a place outside of camp." They picked them up by their linen clothes and conveyed them outside the camp, as Moses had ordered.
Moses commanded Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar, "Do not let your hair become disheveled or rend your garments in mourning, or else you will be put to death and Jehovah will vent his anger upon the entire community. Your relatives, indeed all the Israelites will, however, be permitted to mourn for those Jehovah destroyed in the fire. But you are forbidden to leave the confines of the Tabernacle on pain of death, for you have been anointed by the oil of Jehovah." They did as Moses had bid them.
Jehovah warned Aaron, "You and your successors must never drink wine or any alcoholic beverage before entering the Tabernacle. If you do so, you will suffer death. This will be a permanent rule that must be observed through the generations. It is necessary so that you are able to recognize what is sacred and what is common, what is ritually pure and what is ritually impure, and so you can teach the Israelite people all the decrees that I have given them through Moses."
Moses told Aaron and his surviving sons, Eleazar and Ithamar, "Take what remains of the grain offering after a portion has been sacrificed as a burnt offering and eat it beside the Sacrificial Altar -- but make sure it contains no yeast, for it is sacred. It must be consumed in a sacred place, because it has been given to your and your successors as their share of the burnt offerings made to Jehovah. I have been so instructed. But the breast that was waved before the altar and the thigh that was elevated in the sacrifice may be eaten by your family as well in any place that is ritually pure. They have been allotted to you and your family as their share of the peace offerings made on behalf of the people of Israel. They should be elevated above the altar and presented to Jehovah along with the fat of the burnt offerings, but they will belong to you and your successors as a permanent right, ordained by Jehovah."
Moses asked what had happened to the goat that was the sin offering. When he found it had been entirely burnt, he was angry with Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron's surviving sons. "Why did you not eat the sin offering on the sanctuary grounds? It is sacred; it was given to you so that you could make atonement with Jehovah for the sins of the community. Since its blood was not brought into the Sanctum, you were to eat it in the Tabernacle, as I had commanded you."
Aaron answered Moses, "Look, today they presented to Jehovah the sin offering and the burnt offering -- and then this tragedy befell me. If I had eaten from the sin offering today, would that really have made Jehovah happy?"
When Moses heard what he had to say, he could not but agree with him.
Notes
1. Moses has succeeded in getting the Tabernacle set up, the structures and appurtenances of worship installed, the priests ordained, and the inaugural sacrifices performed, all without a hitch, but then disaster strikes the community of Israel. Aaron's eldest sons and priests of Jehovah violate the correct procedure for Jehovan worship and, as a result, are burned to death by Jehovah. --- The sin of Nadab and Abihu has been the source of much comment and speculation. Their procedural violation may have been burning incense together when it was the role of a single priest, using common incense instead of the approved Temple brand, violating the Inner Sanctum, or performing the ceremony at the wrong time of the day, but most likely their transgression was lighting the incense from their own fire and not from the fire of the Sacrificial Altar, the holy flame that was always to be tended. At this point, this had not been specified as a violation of sacred law, but it is hinted at later in the Bible.
2. That a small violation of temple etiquette should result in a sudden fiery death emphasizes the importance Jehovah placed on having his will obeyed, especially in matters of his worship. He has clearly set up the procedures for his worship and does not want them deviated from even in the smallest way. To do so is to challenge his authority as a god. No one is let off with just a warning, no excuses or alibis are permitted, no extenuating circumstances considered. Make one mistake, step out of line just once and that's the end of you; your body will rot with the hides and guts of sacrificed animals.
3. The reason for the transgression of Nadab and Abihu has also been the subject of considerable biblical commentary. It has been suggested that they had become arrogant and presumptuous and were consciously rebelling against divine law. Jehovan apologists prefer to believe this since it provides a moral lesson and justifies the harshness of Jehovah's retribution, but there is no indication from the original story that this is true. Something entirely different, though, is suggested. Jehovah speaks directly to Aaron (and not through Moses, as is customary) and tells him that there will now be a strict rule against priests drinking alcohol before they officiate. Why the need for a new rule? It seems apparent that Nadab and Abihu must have been drinking beforehand, and it was their inebriated state that caused them to carelessly or willfully make an error in the ritual, to light the incense from their own fires and not from the fire of the Sacrificial Altar, as was proper. The need for the non-drinking rule was probably not obvious to Jehovah when the priesthood was established. One would have thought, as he apparently did, that a priest would appreciate the solemnity of his office and not need to be advised against being drunk on duty. It was not the first, nor would it be the last time, he would be disappointed in his Chosen People.
4. Aaron's cousins are deputized to removed the bodies of Aaron's sons from the Sanctum. The fact that it is specifically mentioned that the bodies were carried out by their clothes suggests that those removing them would have rendered themselves ritually impure, or worse, if they had actually touched the bodies. Some translations, however, say that they were carried in their clothes, rather than by their clothes. I believe the latter interpretation is more likely to be correct, as there is no reason to state that they simply had their clothes on, but that their bodies should not be touched might have been a point worth making.
5. Aaron and his surviving sons are told they must not mourn the dead Nadab and Abihu, or at least may not exhibit the traditional manifestations of grief, allowing one's hair to become disheveled and tearing one's clothes. The show must go on! However, Moses gives them a pass when they don't have the stomach to eat their portion of the sin offering. After the tragic and sudden loss of two family members, it is understandable that goat meat would not be very appetizing. Nevertheless, it is amazing that even the priests, Moses' own family, are so remiss in abiding by instructions set down by Moses and Jehovah. Haven't they, Moses and Jehovah, done enough to command respect and obedience?
6. The incident would have occurred in the Sanctum where the Incense Altar stood before the entrance to the Inner Sanctum that housed the Chest of Sacred Records containing the tablets of the Ten Commandments. The Sacrificial Altar stood outside the Sanctum in the Tabernacle courtyard.
7. It's a wonder the fire that burned Aaron's sons did not set alight the curtains of the Inner Sanctum, especially considering that it must have been a roaring flame that rose up to incinerate them. Also, it is curious that their clothes were not more burned. Of course, if the fire is of miraculous origin, Jehovah could manipulate the miracle to suit his purposes.
8. In the end, one wonders whether this incident truly happened or happened the way in which it is related. Was it included in the narrative as a warning to priests? Does Jehovah take care to watch every ritual performed before his altars, ever ready to catch and punish any deviation from prescribed ritual? It is interesting that Jehovah's preferred method of execution seems to be fire, not an angel sent down with a sword, nor a bolt of lightning coming out of the sky. This, fire, is the same means by which he awed the Israelites when he made his presence known to them.
Aaron's sons, Nadab and Abihu, started a fire in their censers, sprinkled incense into them, and burned it -- but with a fire from an unconsecrated source, contrary what was commanded by Jehovah. Consequently, a flame roared up from the Incense Altar and set them afire so that they perished in front of the Inner Sanctum.
Moses told Aaron, "This is what Jehovah meant when he said, 'Those who minister to me will respect my divinity; before the entire people I will be honored.’”
Aaron had nothing to say in response.
Moses summoned Aaron's cousins, Mishael and Elzaphan, the sons of his uncle Uzziel, and told them, "Come here and carry the bodies of your cousins out of the Sanctum to a place outside of camp." They picked them up by their linen clothes and conveyed them outside the camp, as Moses had ordered.
Moses commanded Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar, "Do not let your hair become disheveled or rend your garments in mourning, or else you will be put to death and Jehovah will vent his anger upon the entire community. Your relatives, indeed all the Israelites will, however, be permitted to mourn for those Jehovah destroyed in the fire. But you are forbidden to leave the confines of the Tabernacle on pain of death, for you have been anointed by the oil of Jehovah." They did as Moses had bid them.
Jehovah warned Aaron, "You and your successors must never drink wine or any alcoholic beverage before entering the Tabernacle. If you do so, you will suffer death. This will be a permanent rule that must be observed through the generations. It is necessary so that you are able to recognize what is sacred and what is common, what is ritually pure and what is ritually impure, and so you can teach the Israelite people all the decrees that I have given them through Moses."
Moses told Aaron and his surviving sons, Eleazar and Ithamar, "Take what remains of the grain offering after a portion has been sacrificed as a burnt offering and eat it beside the Sacrificial Altar -- but make sure it contains no yeast, for it is sacred. It must be consumed in a sacred place, because it has been given to your and your successors as their share of the burnt offerings made to Jehovah. I have been so instructed. But the breast that was waved before the altar and the thigh that was elevated in the sacrifice may be eaten by your family as well in any place that is ritually pure. They have been allotted to you and your family as their share of the peace offerings made on behalf of the people of Israel. They should be elevated above the altar and presented to Jehovah along with the fat of the burnt offerings, but they will belong to you and your successors as a permanent right, ordained by Jehovah."
Moses asked what had happened to the goat that was the sin offering. When he found it had been entirely burnt, he was angry with Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron's surviving sons. "Why did you not eat the sin offering on the sanctuary grounds? It is sacred; it was given to you so that you could make atonement with Jehovah for the sins of the community. Since its blood was not brought into the Sanctum, you were to eat it in the Tabernacle, as I had commanded you."
Aaron answered Moses, "Look, today they presented to Jehovah the sin offering and the burnt offering -- and then this tragedy befell me. If I had eaten from the sin offering today, would that really have made Jehovah happy?"
When Moses heard what he had to say, he could not but agree with him.
Notes
1. Moses has succeeded in getting the Tabernacle set up, the structures and appurtenances of worship installed, the priests ordained, and the inaugural sacrifices performed, all without a hitch, but then disaster strikes the community of Israel. Aaron's eldest sons and priests of Jehovah violate the correct procedure for Jehovan worship and, as a result, are burned to death by Jehovah. --- The sin of Nadab and Abihu has been the source of much comment and speculation. Their procedural violation may have been burning incense together when it was the role of a single priest, using common incense instead of the approved Temple brand, violating the Inner Sanctum, or performing the ceremony at the wrong time of the day, but most likely their transgression was lighting the incense from their own fire and not from the fire of the Sacrificial Altar, the holy flame that was always to be tended. At this point, this had not been specified as a violation of sacred law, but it is hinted at later in the Bible.
2. That a small violation of temple etiquette should result in a sudden fiery death emphasizes the importance Jehovah placed on having his will obeyed, especially in matters of his worship. He has clearly set up the procedures for his worship and does not want them deviated from even in the smallest way. To do so is to challenge his authority as a god. No one is let off with just a warning, no excuses or alibis are permitted, no extenuating circumstances considered. Make one mistake, step out of line just once and that's the end of you; your body will rot with the hides and guts of sacrificed animals.
3. The reason for the transgression of Nadab and Abihu has also been the subject of considerable biblical commentary. It has been suggested that they had become arrogant and presumptuous and were consciously rebelling against divine law. Jehovan apologists prefer to believe this since it provides a moral lesson and justifies the harshness of Jehovah's retribution, but there is no indication from the original story that this is true. Something entirely different, though, is suggested. Jehovah speaks directly to Aaron (and not through Moses, as is customary) and tells him that there will now be a strict rule against priests drinking alcohol before they officiate. Why the need for a new rule? It seems apparent that Nadab and Abihu must have been drinking beforehand, and it was their inebriated state that caused them to carelessly or willfully make an error in the ritual, to light the incense from their own fires and not from the fire of the Sacrificial Altar, as was proper. The need for the non-drinking rule was probably not obvious to Jehovah when the priesthood was established. One would have thought, as he apparently did, that a priest would appreciate the solemnity of his office and not need to be advised against being drunk on duty. It was not the first, nor would it be the last time, he would be disappointed in his Chosen People.
4. Aaron's cousins are deputized to removed the bodies of Aaron's sons from the Sanctum. The fact that it is specifically mentioned that the bodies were carried out by their clothes suggests that those removing them would have rendered themselves ritually impure, or worse, if they had actually touched the bodies. Some translations, however, say that they were carried in their clothes, rather than by their clothes. I believe the latter interpretation is more likely to be correct, as there is no reason to state that they simply had their clothes on, but that their bodies should not be touched might have been a point worth making.
5. Aaron and his surviving sons are told they must not mourn the dead Nadab and Abihu, or at least may not exhibit the traditional manifestations of grief, allowing one's hair to become disheveled and tearing one's clothes. The show must go on! However, Moses gives them a pass when they don't have the stomach to eat their portion of the sin offering. After the tragic and sudden loss of two family members, it is understandable that goat meat would not be very appetizing. Nevertheless, it is amazing that even the priests, Moses' own family, are so remiss in abiding by instructions set down by Moses and Jehovah. Haven't they, Moses and Jehovah, done enough to command respect and obedience?
6. The incident would have occurred in the Sanctum where the Incense Altar stood before the entrance to the Inner Sanctum that housed the Chest of Sacred Records containing the tablets of the Ten Commandments. The Sacrificial Altar stood outside the Sanctum in the Tabernacle courtyard.
7. It's a wonder the fire that burned Aaron's sons did not set alight the curtains of the Inner Sanctum, especially considering that it must have been a roaring flame that rose up to incinerate them. Also, it is curious that their clothes were not more burned. Of course, if the fire is of miraculous origin, Jehovah could manipulate the miracle to suit his purposes.
8. In the end, one wonders whether this incident truly happened or happened the way in which it is related. Was it included in the narrative as a warning to priests? Does Jehovah take care to watch every ritual performed before his altars, ever ready to catch and punish any deviation from prescribed ritual? It is interesting that Jehovah's preferred method of execution seems to be fire, not an angel sent down with a sword, nor a bolt of lightning coming out of the sky. This, fire, is the same means by which he awed the Israelites when he made his presence known to them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)