Deeper Commentary
Lev 24:1 Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying-
The whole congregation of Israel were to bring a
small amount of oil and flour for the bread each week. The constantly
burning oil and presence of the small loaves was a symbol of how Israel
were continually before Him. Yet the amount of oil and flour required each
week was miniscule in comparison to the size of all Israel- there were
probably three million of them at the time this law was given (Ex. 12:37).
But God is the God of small things. In the very small things we offer Him,
we are remembered before Him. Israel were taught that this tiny offering
of oil and flour each week was so highly significant; offering even very
small things shouldn’t be seen by us as unnecessary or insignificant
before God. The way Jesus noticed the widow offering two tiny coins and
commented upon it is proof of this (Lk. 21:2).
Lev 24:2 Command the children of Israel, that they bring to you pure olive
oil beaten for the light, to cause a lamp to burn continually-
"Pure olive oil" apparently refers to olive juice which bursts
naturally from the first ripe olives. But we enquire where Israel obtained
olive oil from in the wilderness, especially such "pure" olive oil to such
great amounts as required here? Perhaps they had been given lots of it as
they left Egypt and gave it to the priests. But for 40 years? I suggest as
on Ex. 27:8 that this was God's ideal intention, and many of these laws
were applicable only in contexts when obedience to them was possible.
God's law is not therefore at all a reflection of a God who is a
literalist or legalist. For by its nature, the law of Moses shows that He
was not like that.
Lev 24:3 Outside of the veil of the Testimony, in the Tent of
Meeting, shall Aaron keep it in order from evening to morning before
Yahweh continually: it shall be a statute forever throughout your
generations-
Ex. 27:21 adds "Aaron and his sons".
"The tent of meeting" is the tent where God met with His people over the
blood of atonement upon the ark of the covenant. But that "meeting" was
effectively not with the people, as only the priests entered into the holy
place, and the high priest alone, only once / year, into the ultimate
place where God met with His people- the Most Holy place. But the
candlestick was to be kept burning in order to point the way into the Most
Holy. All this suggested that there was something lacking in the entire
system. God was prepared and even willing to meet with His people over the
blood of atonement on the day of atonement. That meeting was therefore
predicated upon their repentance and forgiveness. But it would have left
the people aware that a fuller meeting with God was somehow promised. And
this would come to full term when the Lord's death tore down the veil, and
the way into the holiest was opened for all, not just the priests nor the
High Priest.
Lev 24:4 He shall keep in order the lamps on the pure gold lampstand
before Yahweh continually-
The lampstand is used as a symbol of the ecclesia in
the visions of Revelation 2 and 3. The purpose of the ecclesia is to
enable the oil of the Spirit to be burnt, to turn it into light. We are to
keep our own personal light burning continually, day and night. Jesus had
this in mind when He likened us to women waiting for the bridegroom to
come at night, whose oil lamps should not be allowed to go out (Mt. 25:8).
The lampstand is a symbol of the ecclesia; the lamps are us. The
oil is the spirit of Jesus. Aaron was as Jesus. He daily ‘orders’ us,
enabling us to shine. Jesus understood this to be so in saying that He
came to fan men's’ lamps into brighter light, to mend smoking flax, not
give up on it. And He is actively about this work on a daily basis as were
the priests.
Lev 24:5 You shall take fine flour, and bake twelve cakes of it: two tenth
parts of an ephah shall be in one cake-
These "cakes" were quite large seeing that about six pints of flour
were used for each of them.
Lev 24:6 You shall set them in two rows, six on a row, on the pure gold
table before Yahweh-
The bread on the table connects with the breaking of
bread at the table of the Lord under the New Covenant. The bread was
replaced- as it were eaten by God- each week (:8). Whilst there is no
specific command as to how frequently we should break bread, it would seem
from Acts 20:7 that some of the early Christians did it weekly, and this
is no bad example for us to follow.
Lev 24:7 You shall put pure frankincense on each row, that it may make the
bread be for a memorial, even an offering made by fire to Yahweh-
Many times we read of God being provoked to remember someone, often
for good (Lev. 24:7 LXX "that God may mercifully remember"; Ps. 69:1 LXX;
37:1 LXX; Zech. 6:14; 1 Kings 17:18). This language of limitation surely
suggests that the God who could be omniscient over time, not needing to
have anything brought back to His memory, allows Himself to 'forget' so
that sin or righteousness again brings things to His remembrance. Thus
generosity and prayer is a memorial before God in the sense that it brings
a person to His memory or attention (Acts 10:4), and He appropriately
responds in their lives.
The "memorial portion" of the offerings was to serve as a reminder to God, as it were, of the covenants which He "remembered". He of course doesn't forget His covenant but ever remembers it (Ps. 105:8 etc.), yet He is presented in human terms as having His memory rekindled, as it were, by human prayer, faith, situations and sacrifices so that He "remembers the covenant" (Gen. 8:1; 9:15; Ex. 2:24; 6:5; Lev. 26:42,45; Num. 10:9 and often). The regular sacrifices were such a "memorial" or 'reminder'- both to God and to His people. The place of prayer, regular sacrifice of giving, breaking of bread at the "memorial meeting" etc., are all equivalents for us under the new covenant.
Paul writes often that he "makes mention" or 'remembers' his brethren in
regular prayer (Rom. 1:9; Eph. 1:16; 1 Thess. 1:2; Philemon 4). The Greek
mneia is the word used in the LXX for the "memorial" of the incense
or the meal offering (Lev. 2:2,16; 6:15; 24:7), or the constant fire on
the altar (Lev. 6:12,13). That fire, that flour, that incense, had to be
carefully and consciously prepared; it had to be the result of man's
labour. And likewise, Paul seems to be saying, he first of all thought
through the cases which he then presented to the Father.
Lev 24:8 Every Sabbath day he shall set it in order before Yahweh
continually. It is on the behalf of the children of Israel an everlasting
covenant-
The whole Law of Moses is described as an everlasting covenant (Is.
24:5; Dt. 29:29), but it has now been done away (Heb. 8:13). The feasts of
Passover and Atonement were to be “an everlasting statute unto you” (Lev.
16:34; Ex. 12:14); but now the Mosaic feasts have been done away in Christ
(Col. 2:14-17; 1 Cor. 5:7). The Levitical priesthood was “the covenant of
an everlasting priesthood” (Ex. 40:15; Num. 25:13), but “the priesthood
being changed (by Christ’s work), there is made of necessity a change also
of the law” (Heb. 7:12). There was an “everlasting covenant” between God
and Israel to display the shewbread in the Holy Place (Lev. 24:8). This
“everlasting covenant” evidently ended when the Mosaic Law was dismantled.
But the same phrase “everlasting covenant” is used in 2 Samuel 23:5
concerning how Christ will reign on David’s throne for literal eternity in
the Kingdom. In what sense, then, is God using the word olahm, which is
translated “eternal”, “perpetual”, “everlasting” in the Old Testament?
James Strong defines olahm as literally meaning “the finishing point, time
out of mind, i.e. practically eternity”. It was God’s purpose that the Law
of Moses and the associated Sabbath law were to continue for many
centuries. To the early Israelite, this meant a finishing point so far
ahead that he couldn’t grapple with it; therefore he was told that the Law
would last for ever in the sense of “practically eternity”. For all of us,
the specter of ultimate infinity is impossible to intellectually grapple
with. We may glibly talk about God’s eternity and timelessness, about the
wonder of eternal life. But when we pause to really come to terms with
these things, we lack the intellectual tools and linguistic paradigms to
cope with it. Therefore there is no Hebrew or Greek word used in the Bible
text to speak of absolute infinity. We know that death has been conquered
for those in Christ, therefore we have the hope of immortal life in his
Kingdom. But God speaks about eternity very much from a human viewpoint.
Lev 24:9 It shall be for Aaron and his sons; and they shall eat it in a
holy place; for it is most holy to him of the offerings of Yahweh made by
fire by a perpetual statute-
The priests had no inheritance amongst Israel, they survived by
eating parts of the offerings. Their eating of them represented God’s
‘eating’ of the sacrifices, the altar being described as His table (Mal.
1:7,12), and His acceptance of the offerer and fellowship with them- for
eating what had been brought to you was a sign of acceptance and religious
fellowship with the donor.
Lev 24:10 The son of an Israelite woman, whose father was an Egyptian-
This suggests there was some intermarriage between the Egyptians and
Israelites, which explains why a mixed multitude left Egypt with the
Israelites. That mixed multitude were apparently not spiritually committed
to the things of Israel's God once the going got tough in the desert (Ex.
11:4). The similarity of phrasing with Ex. 2:11 leads the rabbis to claim
that this was the son of the Egyptian whom Moses slew. See on :17.
Went out among the children of Israel; and the son of the Israelite
woman and a man of Israel strove together in the camp-
"Went out" is to be connected with how the rebels of Num. 16:27 "came
out" in argument as in Prov. 25:8. This striving together could have been
in a legal sense, before the judges. The idea is not necessarily of a
literal fight between the two men. Perhaps when he was judged against, he
blasphemed (:10). The idea is certainly that his blasphemy was done openly
and publically in the spirit of rebellion. As the Israelites encamped
according to "the names of the tribes of their fathers" (Num. 26:55), it
could be that this man whose father was an Egyptian was somehow encamped
outside the camp, and he had come into the camp to foment rebellion and
express his anger at his position. However the command in :17 could
suggest that the half Egyptian had slain an Israelite in this striving.
Lev 24:11 The son of the Israelite woman blasphemed the Name, and cursed;
and they brought him to Moses-
Perhaps he repeated the language of Pharaoh who did the same (Ex.
5:2). The context is of the shewbread, so perhaps the striving together in
:10 was connected with the use of the shewbread. Bringing the case to
Moses suggests that it had first been brought before the system of judges
beneath him (Ex. 18:13-26). This confirms the suggestion made on :10 that
the striving together may have been before the judges, as it were in
court.
His mother’s name was Shelomith, the
daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan-
If we marry out of the family of faith (:10), our children
may well not have the reverence towards the true God which they should
have. Her name may have been preserved as a permanent reproach for her
influence upon her apostate son; or perhaps we are to understand her name,
"Peaceable", and her father's name "Man of the words", and her tribe
"Judgment", as implying that she was faithful and not associated with her
son's apostacy.
Lev 24:12 They put him in custody, until the will of Yahweh about this
should be declared to them-
A similar incident was dealt with the same way in Num. 15:34. It was
clear that the person should be executed, but perhaps the question was
what method of execution should be used, as it was unclear whether he was
to be treated as a Jew or Gentile.
Lev 24:13 Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying-
The penalty of death by stoning was appropriate to an Israelite,
whereas Gentiles would have been slain by the sword. So although the man
was the son of an Egyptian, and foreigners only entered the congregation
after three generations (Dt. 23:8), this man was treated as an Israelite.
So as ever in God's judgments, we discern even there some element of
grace.
Lev 24:14 Bring out of the camp him who cursed; and let all who heard him
lay their hands on his head, and let all the congregation stone him-
The Lord Jesus suffered and died, shedding the blood of atonement,
"outside the camp" (Heb. 13:13). We are bidden go forth to the Lord Jesus
"outside the camp", just as those who "sought Yahweh" did when there was
no tabernacle (Ex. 33:7). The people watching Moses as he walked out to
it, without the camp, therefore looks ahead to a faithless Israel lining
the via Dolorossa and watching the Lord walk out to His place of
crucifixion. And we are to get behind Him and follow Him there, stepping
out from the mass of Israel. As the Lord Jesus suffered "outside the
camp", so various parts of the Mosaic sacrifices were to be burnt there
(Lev. 4:12,21; 8:17; 9:11; 16:27); and yet it was the blood of those
sacrifices which achieved atonement (Heb. 13:11; Num. 19:3,9). "Outside
the camp" was the place of excluded, condemned sinners (Lev. 13:46; 24:14;
Num. 5:3,4; 15:35,36; 31:13,19), and it was here that the Lord Jesus died,
in identification with us.
Lev 24:15 You shall speak to the children of Israel, saying, ‘Whoever
curses his God shall bear his sin-
This contrasts with how the one who blasphemed the name of Yahweh was
to be killed (:16). The command is specifically in the context of the
Egyptian man who had blasphemed Yahweh. It is as if God is saying that
blasphemers of their own gods were still in sin, but Yahweh pronounced no
judgment upon them. This is one of a number of Biblical examples of where
God requires some level of integrity from those who don't know Him and
have their own wrong religious ideas. He even apparently commends the
Gentiles for not changing their gods and being faithful to them, whilst
lamenting Israel's penchant for many gods and their unfaithfulness to all
of them.
Lev 24:16 He who blasphemes the name of Yahweh, he shall surely be put to
death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him: the foreigner as
well as the native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to
death-
This seems to answer the unclarity which was the reason for Moses
asking God's advice; they were unsure whether to treat this man as a
foreigner or an Israelite. See on :12,13.
Lev 24:17 He who strikes any man mortally shall surely be put to death-
This additional clarification could be in the immediate context of
the striving between the half Egyptian and the Israelite in :10. Perhaps
the Israelite had been killed. If indeed this man was the son of the
Egyptian whom Moses slew (see on :10), then we can better understand why
his abiding anger led him to want to slay an Israelite in revenge.
Lev 24:18 He who strikes an animal mortally shall make it good, life for
life-
The context seems to suggest that this was a slaying of an animal
intentionally in order to damage the owner.
Lev 24:19 If anyone injures his neighbour; as he has done, so shall it be
done to him-
This command may be in connection with the fight between the two men
of :10. The equivalent command in Ex. 21:22-25 is also in the context of
two men fighting.
Lev 24:20 fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; as he has
injured someone, so shall it be done to him-
When the Lord Jesus gave His commandments as an
elaboration of Moses' Law, that Law was still in force. He didn't say
'When I'm dead, this is how you should behave...'. He was showing us a
higher level; but in the interim period until the Law was taken out of the
way, He was opening up the choice of taking that higher level, even
though making use of the concessions which Moses offered would not have
been a sin during that period. Thus He spoke of not insisting on "an eye
for an eye"; even though in certain cases the Law did allow for this. He
was saying: 'You can keep Moses' Law, and take an eye for an eye. But
there is a higher level: to simply forgive'.
Lev 24:21 He who kills an animal shall make it good; and he who kills a
man shall be put to death-
The slain animal was to replaced by another animal; the slain man was
to be replaced, as it were, by the death of the murderer. The idea of
'making it good' could possibly hint that through his willing submission
to death, the murderer could be forgiven. The Hebrew shalam
carries with it the idea of making peace, but the death of the murderer
could only make peace with God rather than with the man whom he had slain.
Lev 24:22 You shall have one kind of law, for the foreigner as well as the
native-born; for I am Yahweh your God’-
If we have unbelievers into our homes or any
situation where we are in charge of the social situation, we are to ensure
that God’s principles are upheld. Again translating this into modern
terms- if parents have unbelieving children in their home to play with
their own children, God’s principles are still to be upheld by the
visitors.
Lev 24:23 Moses spoke to the children of Israel; and they brought out him
who had cursed out of the camp, and stoned him with stones. The children
of Israel did as Yahweh commanded Moses-
The essential idea of the Hebrew word used for cursing here is to
treat as a light thing (s.w. 1 kings 16:31 "as if it had been a light
thing"). To treat the things of God as a mere hobby, as light rather than
"heavy", which is the idea of the Hebrew kabod translated
"glory"... is to curse God. It is the same idea as taking God's Name in
vain, as a vain, light thing. And this is the problem with hobby level
religion. What may begin as a mere religious hobby may lead us to the
eternal weight of God's glory. And no longer must we treat these things as
a light thing. True spirituality must eclipse mere religion. And if it
doesn't, then we risk effectively cursing God, treating Him as a light
thing, just a passing part of our lives...
Previous Chapter
