Either a bull or a lamb that has any deformity or lacking in his parts, that you may offer for a free will offering; but for a vow it shall not be accepted.
Parallel Translations
-
Either a bull or a lamb that has any deformity or lacking in his parts, that you may offer for a free will offering; but for a vow it shall not be accepted.
-
Either a bullock or a lamb that hath any thing superfluous or lacking in his parts, that mayest thou offer for a freewill offering; but for a vow it shall not be accepted.
-
Either a bullock or a lamb that hath any thing too long or too short, that mayest thou offer for a freewill-offering; but for a vow it shall not be accepted.
Cross-references (1)
Passages linked to Leviticus 22:23 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Leviticus 21:18 For whatever man he is that has a defect, he shall not draw near: a blind man, or a lame, or he who has a flat nose, or any deformity,
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (11 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain Lev 22:23 Either a bullock or a lamb that…
Lev 22:23 Either a bullock or a lamb that hath any thing superfluous or lacking in his parts, that mayest thou offer [for] a freewill offering; but for a vow it shall not be accepted.
Ver. 23. That mayest thou offer.] Though it have some kind of defect, yet, in free will offerings, it might pass. This was to signify that our imperfect obedience after that we are once in Christ, is accepted by Christ, who is without all blame and blemish.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain That mayest thou offer; either,
That mayest thou offer; either,
1. To the priest, who might, according to the rules given by God, either convert it to his own use, or sell it, and lay out the price of it upon the temple or sacrifices. But in this sense any of the other kinds, as blind, or broken, &c., might be offered, which yet are forbidden to be offered Lev 22:22. Or rather,
Read full note →
2. To the Lord, as is expressed Lev 22:22,24, this being put down by way of opposition to those defects, Lev 22:22, and by way of exception from the general rule, Lev 22:21.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain Ye shall not offer unto the Lord that which…
Ye shall not offer unto the Lord that which bruised, or crushed, or broken, or cut,.... The Targum of Jonathan is, whose testicles are pressed and bruised, and whose nerves are corrupted and bruised, and so most Jewish writers interpret it:
neither shall you make any offering thereof in your land; any offering of any sort, either burnt offering or peace offering, or any other; or ye shall not do, that is, any such thing as here suggested, not bruise, or crush, or break, or cut the testicles of any creature; so the above writers.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 23. That hath anything superfluous or lacking] The…
Verse 23. That hath anything superfluous or lacking] The term שרוע sarua signifies any thing extended beyond the usual size, and the term קלוט kalut signifies any thing unusually contracted; and both mean any monstrosity, whether in redundance or defect. Such things, it seems, might be offered for a freewill-offering, because that was not prescribed by the law; God left it to a man's piety and gratitude to offer such additional gifts as he could: what the law required was indispensably necessary, because it pointed out the Gospel economy; but he that made a vow to offer such a sacrifice as the law had not required, could of course bring an imperfect offering. Some contend that the last clause of this verse should be thus read: If thou offer it either for a freewill-offering, or for a vow, it shall not be accepted. It was the opinion of the Jews, and it appears to be correct, that none of these imperfect animals were ever offered on the altar; but the person who made the freewill-offering of such things as he had, sold the animal, and gave its price for the support of the sanctuary.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain Lev 22:23. That mayest thou offer — The Hebrew…
Lev 22:23. That mayest thou offer — The Hebrew here will bear a different translation, which, indeed, seems necessary to reconcile this with the twenty-first verse, namely, Shouldest thou offer it for a free-will-offering or for a vow, it would not be accepted.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Ear....cut. Hebrew saruang, which is translated a crooked nose,…
CHAPTER XXII.
Ear....cut. Hebrew saruang, which is translated a crooked nose, chap. xxi. 18. The Septuagint and Syriac agree here with the Vulgate: but the moderns generally adopt the interpretation of the Rabbins, who say the word is applied to those animals whose double members, feet, ears, &c., are disproportionately long; as kolut, means too short. (Bochart) (Calmet) --- Voluntarily, for the use of the priests, but not for any sacrifice, ver. 21. (Du Hamel)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain that mayest thou offer, &c.--The passage should be rendered…
that mayest thou offer, &c.--The passage should be rendered thus: "if thou offer it either for a freewill offering, or for a vow, it shall not be accepted." This sacrifice being required to be "without blemish" [Lev 22:19], symbolically implied that the people of God were to dedicate themselves wholly with sincere purposes of heart, and its being required to be "perfect to be accepted" [Lev 22:21], led them typically to Him without whom no sacrifice could be offered acceptable to God.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 23. A freewill offering — Since this is a…
23. A freewill offering — Since this is a gift, and not a debt, an animal having a member too many or too few may be used. This is the significance of superfluous. See Lev_21:18, note.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 23. but for a vow] The three varieties included…
23. but for a vow] The three varieties included under the name Peace-Offering were, as has been noticed (see on Lev_7:11), (a) Thank-Offerings (here mentioned as a separate item in Lev_22:29, (b) Votive-Offerings, and (c) Freewill-Offerings. The first (see W.P.Paterson, HDB, Art. Sacrifice, p. 338) was offered in acknowledgment of benefits received, the second and third were combined with prayer for blessings hoped for. These two differed thus, that the Freewill-Offering was simply in support of the prayer, and was made in anticipation of the benefit asked. The vow was promised on fulfilment of the prayer, and thus, unlike the Freewill-Offering, need not be offered if the prayer remained unfulfilled. According to this v., gratitude for the answer was to be indicated by the greater stringency of the regulation as to the nature of the animal to be offered in acknowledgment of the mercy vouchsafed.
For the general prohibition to offer a sacrifice that had a blemish, cp. the rebuke in Mal_1:8; Mal_1:13.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (23) Either a bullock or a lamb.—Better, And bullock…
(23) Either a bullock or a lamb.—Better, And bullock and one of the flock.
That hath any thing superfluous.—That is one member of the animal being more elongated or contracted than the other, being out of proportion. The same blemish also unfitted the priest for performing sacerdotal functions (see Lev_21:18).
Read full note →
Or lacking in his parts.—This, according to the authorities during the second Temple, denotes contracted hoofs, or undivided hoofs, making them resemble those of an ass or horse.
That mayest thou offer for a freewill offering.—Better, that thou mayest make a freewill offering. As Lev_22:18-20 most emphatically declare that an animal with any blemish whatsoever must not be offered “for any manner of freewill offering,” it is hardly conceivable that the lawgiver would contradict this enactment within the space of three verses, and say “that the animals with those serious organic defects enumerated in the verse before us, thou mayest offer for a freewill offering.” Hence, during the second Temple, the passage before us was interpreted to mean that the animals in question were only allowed to be consecrated for the maintenance and repair of the sanctuary, but not to be offered as a sacrifice on the altar. They were sold, or the offerer paid the value himself, and the money was applied to these sacred purposes. The opinion that a freewill offering was of less importance than a vow, and that therefore the lawgiver allows animals with the two kinds of defects here described to be offered for a freewill offering but not for a vow, is contrary to the regulations laid down in Lev_22:18-20, and is against the practice during the second Temple (see Lev_7:16). It is far more probable that the text is disarranged, and that it originally was, “that thou mayest not offer for a freewill offering, and for a vow it shall not be accepted.”
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 22:23 The requirements for the voluntary offering were more…
22:23 The requirements for the voluntary offering were more lenient, allowing the use of a deformed animal. Fulfilling a vow, however, still required an animal that was not maimed or diseased. In no case would God accept a sacrifice that could not be eaten by a person or that was not a whole animal.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.