For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.
Jump to: Alford • Barnes • Bengel • Benson • BI • Calvin • Cambridge • Chrysostom • Clarke • Darby • Ellicott • Expositor's • Exp Dct • Exp Grk • Gaebelein • GSB • Gill • Gray • Haydock • Hastings • Homiletics • ICC • JFB • Kelly • KJT • Lange • MacLaren • MHC • MHCW • Meyer • Parker • PNT • Poole • Pulpit • Sermon • SCO • TTB • VWS • WES • TSK
EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)Hebrews 13:11. For, &c. — As if he had said, This was shown figuratively in the law; for the bodies of those beasts whose blood is brought — On the day of atonement; into the sanctuary — The holy of holies; by the high-priest, for sin — To make expiation of it; are burned without the camp — See Leviticus 4:12; and therefore no part of them could be eaten by the priest or people; so they who, under the gospel, adhere to that way of worship, cannot partake of Christ, who is the truth signified by that type. In other words, according to their own law, the sin-offerings were wholly consumed, and no Jew ever ate thereof. But Christ was a sin-offering; therefore they cannot feed upon him as we do. This is explained more at large by Macknight, thus: “This law, concerning the bodies of the animals whose blood the high-priest carried into the holy places, we have Leviticus 16:27. The same law is given concerning all the proper sin- offerings, Leviticus 6:30; from which it appears that neither the priest, who offered the sin-offerings, nor the people, for whom they offered them, were to eat of them. Wherefore, if the eating of the burnt-offerings and peace-offerings was permitted, to show that the offerers were at peace with God, as their political Ruler, it may fairly be presumed that the prohibition to eat any part of the bodies of animals whose blood was brought into the holy places as an atonement, was intended to make the Israelites sensible that their sins against God, as moral Governor of the world, were not pardoned through these atonements; not even by the sacrifices which were offered by the high-priest on the tenth of the seventh month, which, like the rest, were to be wholly burned. Unless this was the intention of the law, the apostle could not, from that prohibition, have argued with truth that they who worshipped in the tabernacles with the sin- offerings, had no right to eat of the Christian altar. Whereas if, by forbidding the priests and people to eat the sin-offerings, the law declared that their offences against God, as moral Governor of the world, were not pardoned thereby, it was in effect a declaration, as the apostle affirms, that they had no right to eat of the Christian altar; that is, to share in the pardon which Christ hath procured for sinners by his death, who trusted in the Levitical sacrifices for pardon and acceptance with God.”
Whose blood is brought into the sanctuary - ; see the notes on Hebrews 9:7, Hebrews 9:12. "Are burned without the camp;" Leviticus 4:12, Leviticus 4:21; Leviticus 16:27. The "camp" here refers to the time when the Israelites were in the wilderness, and lived in encampments. The same custom was observed after the temple was built by conveying the body of the animal slain for a sin-offering on the great day of atonement beyond the walls of Jerusalem to be consumed there. "Whatever," says Grotius, "was not lawful to be done in the camp, afterward was not lawful to be done in the city."
for—reason why they who serve the tabernacle, are excluded from share in Christ; because His sacrifice is not like one of those sacrifices in which they had a share but answers to one which was "wholly burned" outside (the Greek is "burnt completely," "consumed by burning"), and which consequently they could not eat of. Le 6:30, gives the general rule, "No sin offering whereof any of the blood is brought into the tabernacle of the congregation to reconcile withal in the holy place, shall be eaten; it shall be burnt in the fire." The sin offerings are twofold: the outward, whose blood was sprinkled on the outward altar, and of whose bodies the priests might eat; and the inward, the reverse.
the sanctuary—here the Holy of Holies, into which the blood of the sin offering was brought on the day of atonement.
without the camp—in which were the tabernacle and Levitical priests and legal worshippers, during Israel's journey through the wilderness; replaced afterwards by Jerusalem (containing the temple), outside of whose walls Jesus was crucified.for annexing it to it; that the Jews and Judaizing Christians had no right to eat of the Christian altar, for a law of their own excludes them from it, which is written, Leviticus 6:30 16:27: That the bodies of those living creatures, which were yearly sacrificed as a sin-offering for priests and people, both of the bull and the he-goat, with their skins, &c., were burnt wholly without the camp; so as neither the priests nor any of the people had any part of this bull or goat allowed them to eat, having no right to it by the law of God, which otherwise ordered it. This is the literal sense, yet the use of it is anagogical, leading us to higher things; as that the high priest signified Christ, God-man; the altar, his Godhead; the sanctuary, heaven itself; the sacrifice, his human nature, the true sin-offering, of which neither priest nor people serving the tabernacle ought to eat. Numbers 19:1 nor the sin offering in general, Leviticus 6:30 nor those for the priest and people, Leviticus 4:11 but the bullock and goat, on the day of atonement, Leviticus 16:11 which were typical of Christ, in the bringing of their blood into the most holy place, by the high priest, for sin; and in the burning of them, without the camp: these beasts were slain, their blood was shed, and was brought into the most holy place, by the high priest; and was sprinkled on the mercy seat, and the horns of the altar of incense; and, by it, atonement was made for the priest, his house, and all Israel; which was a type of the death of Christ; the shedding of his blood; the carrying of it into heaven; the sprinkling it upon the throne of grace and mercy; by which reconciliation is made for the sins of all God's people:
whose blood is brought into the sanctuary: that is, into the holy of holies, as the Ethiopic version renders it:
by the high priest for sin; to make atonement for it, for his own, and for the sins of his family, and of all Israel:
are burnt without the camp, Leviticus 16:27 even their skins, flesh, and dung; and the men that burnt them were unclean, though, upon being washed, were received: which was typical of the dolorous sufferings of Christ without Jerusalem, as the next verse shows; and points out the extent of his sufferings, reaching to all parts of his body, and even to his soul; and expresses not only the pains, but the shame and reproach he endured, signified by the burning of the dung; and hints at the pardon of the wicked Jews, who were concerned in his sufferings; which was applied unto them upon their repentance.For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.
EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)Hebrews 13:11-12. Proof for Hebrews 13:10. The proof lies in the fact that Christ’s sacrifice is one which has been presented without the camp, and consequently has been freed from all community with Judaism. Hebrews 13:11 and Hebrews 13:12 are, as a proof of Hebrews 13:10, closely connected, and only in Hebrews 13:12 lies the main factor, whereas Hebrews 13:11 is related to the same as a merely preparatory and accessory thought (Bähr). For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest are burned without the camp; wherefore Jesus also, in order that He might sanctify the people through His own blood, suffered without the gate. That is to say: The N. T. sacrifice of the covenant is typically prefigured by the great atoning sacrifice under the Old Covenant. Of the victims, however, which were devoted to the latter, neither the high priest nor any other member of the Jewish theocracy was permitted to eat anything. For of those animals only the blood was taken, in order to be brought by the high priest into the Most Holy Place as a propitiatory offering; the bodies of those animals, on the other hand, were burned without the camp or holy city (Leviticus 16:27), wherein was contained the explanation in an act (comp. Bähr, l.c.), that they were cast out from the theocratic communion of Judaism. But thus, then, has Jesus also, in that He entered with His sacrificial blood into the heavenly Holy of Holies, made expiation for the sins of them that believe in Him; His sacrificial body, however, has, since He was led out of the camp, or beyond the gate of the holy city, in order to endure the infliction of death (comp. Leviticus 24:14; Numbers 15:35 f.; Deuteronomy 17:5), declared by this act to be cast out from the Jewish covenant-people. Eat of His sacrificial body, i.e. obtain part in the blessing procured by His sacrifice, can therefore no one who is still within the camp, i.e. who still looks for salvation from the ordinances of Judaism. Consequently he who will eat of the altar of Christ must depart out of Judaism, and go forth unto Christ without the camp (Hebrews 13:13).
τὰ ἅγια] as Hebrews 9:8; Hebrews 9:12; Hebrews 9:24-25, Hebrews 10:19, the Most Holy Place.
The tenses in the present mark the practice as one still continuing.
παρεμβολή] Characterization of the dwelling-place of the Jewish people at the time of the lawgiving, while it was still journeying through the wilderness and had tents for its habitation. The camp was the complex of the tents, enclosing the totality of the people together with the sanctuary. Thus there was combined with the idea of locality the religious reference to the people as one covenant-people, and “without the camp” became equivalent in signification to “without the bounds of the Old Covenant.” But, since afterwards the city of Jerusalem, with the temple in its midst, took the place of the παρεμβολή, the ἔξω τῆς πύλης standing in Hebrews 13:12, without the gate, sc. of the city of Jerusalem, says in effect the same thing as ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς, Hebrews 13:11; Hebrews 13:13.
διό] wherefore, i.e. because the sacrificial death of Jesus has been prefigured by the type mentioned, Hebrews 13:11.
ἰδίου] opposition to the animal blood in the O. T. sacrifices of atonement.
τὸν λαόν] see at Hebrews 2:16, p. 132.
ἔπαθεν] comp. Hebrews 9:26.11. are burnt without the camp] Of the sin-offerings the Priests could not, as in the case of other offerings, eat the entire flesh, or the breast and shoulder, or all except the fat (Numbers 6:20; Leviticus 6:26, &c.). The word for “burn” (saraph) means “entirely to get rid of,” and is not the word used for burning upon the altar. The rule that these sin-offerings should be burned, not eaten, was stringent (Leviticus 6:30; Leviticus 16:27).Hebrews 13:11. Ὧν γὰρ εἰσφέρεται) Leviticus 6:23 (30), And no sin-offering, whereof any of the blood εἰσενεχθῇ, is brought into the tabernacle of the testimony, to reconcile Hebrews 9:12-13.—αἷμα· σώματα, blood; bodies) which were the shadows of the blood and of the body of Christ.—ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς) without the camp, in which were the tabernacle, and the Levitical priests, and as many of them as adhered to that worship. So the LXX., Leviticus 4:12; Leviticus 4:21, etc., Leviticus 16:27.Verses 11, 12. - For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the High Priest for sin (i.e. as sin offerings; for this sense of περὶ ἁμαρτίας, cf. Hebrews 10:6), are burned without the camp. Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people through his own blood, suffered without the gate. The allusion is to the sin offerings on the Day of Atonement - the bullock for the high priest, and the goat for the people. Of the flesh of some sacrifices of ordinary peace offerings - the people ate, being themselves "partakers of the altar;" that of ordinary sin offerings was partaken of by the priests alone: but the special sin offerings of the great day, which typified complete atonement, and the blood of which alone was taken into the holiest of all, were consumed entirely by fire without the camp, and not even the priests might eat of them (Leviticus 16:27, etc.). This part of the ceremonial, not mentioned in Hebrews 9, completed the symbolism of the Day of Atonement. It not only typified (together with the other goat that was set free) the entire removal of sin from the congregation; it also signified that the Law itself made none, not even the priests, partakers in such complete atonement. Christ fulfilled the first significance of this type by suffering "without the gate;" the Jews, in casting him out from their midst, were the unconscious instruments of his so fulfilling it; he thus bare and took away the sins of all outside the holy city which represented the Israel of God. But further, in him is supplied what under the Law was wanting; for of him, the true Sin Offering, we may all partake: he declared this himself when he spoke of our caring his flesh and drinking his blood - in which words the mention of the blood as well as of the flesh is peculiarly significant; for of the blood, which was "given upon the altar to make atonement for sins" (Leviticus 17:11), none might in any case under the Law partake; but of him we even drink the blood, in token that atonement is completed, and that we are now full partakers in all its benefits. The only seeming discrepancy between the type and the Antitype, as above set forth, is in the order of the different parts of the old ceremonial. The sin offering was slain in the camp before it was burnt outside, whereas Christ fulfilled both these parts of the type by one act upon the cross outside. Again, the blood of the sin offering was taken into the holy of holies before the body was consumed by fire outside, whereas Christ entered the heavenly sanctuary "with his own blood" after he had suffered "without the gate." But the general significance of the symbolism in its several parts is not thus disturbed; it is viewed as a whole, and all parts of it are found to be fulfilled. In saying, "we have an altar," and implying that we eat of it, the writer has surely the Eucharist in view, though it does not follow that θυσιαστήριον means definitely the table on which it is celebrated. He may, as some explain, have especially in his mind the cross on which the sacrifice was once for all completed; or he may have had no definite local image before him, seeing rather (as elsewhere in the Epistle) in spiritual realities and relations the counterparts of the Levitical symbols. But that the Holy Communion is alluded to, even if it were not apparent here, might be concluded from 1 Corinthians 10:14-22, where similar phrases are used with distinct reference to it. There St. Paul is dissuading from participation in heathen sacrificial feasts, as being inconsistent with partaking of the Holy Communion; and he says in this connection, "Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices (ἐσθίοντες τὰς θυσίας) partakers of the altar (κοινωνοὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου)?" It is evident that "partakers of the Lord's table" (ver. 21) are regarded as being thereby partakers of the Christian altar, of which mention is made in the text before us. It may be observed that the use here of the word θυσιαστηρίον may be held to justify - and this without implying any actual repetition of the one accomplished sacrifice - the application of the term "altar" to the table on which the Eucharist is celebrated, as does 1 Corinthians 10:21 the term "the Lord's table." Both terms were so applied from very early times. The holy tables in our churches are altars, in that on them is continually commemorated and pleaded the one sacrifice of the cross, and that from them the spiritual food of the body and blood is given to the faithful. Leviticus 16, and comp. Hebrews 9:7. Of the victims offered on that occasion neither people nor priest were allowed to eat. The blood of the bullock and of one of the goats was carried into the sanctuary and sprinkled upon the mercy-seat, and afterward on the horns of the great altar outside; and the bodies of the slain animals were burned in a clean place outside of the camp or city.
Lit. living creatures. The victims for the Day of Atonement were a bullock and two young goats for sin-offerings, and two rams for burnt-offerings. Only one goat, chosen by lot, was slain; the other served as the scape-goat. Ζῶον animal is not used elsewhere of a sacrificial victim, either in N.T. or lxx. The word in N.T. mostly in Revelation. See on Revelation 1:16; see on Revelation 4:6.
Without the camp (ἔξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς)
Burning without the camp was also required in the case of victims offered at the consecration of the priests, Exodus 29:14; at the sin-offering for the priest, Leviticus 4:11, Leviticus 4:12; and at the sin-offering for the congregation, Leviticus 4:21. For παρεμβολή camp, see on Acts 21:34.
LinksHebrews 13:11 Interlinear
Hebrews 13:11 Parallel Texts
Hebrews 13:11 NIV
Hebrews 13:11 NLT
Hebrews 13:11 ESV
Hebrews 13:11 NASB
Hebrews 13:11 KJV
Hebrews 13:11 Bible Apps
Hebrews 13:11 Parallel
Hebrews 13:11 Biblia Paralela
Hebrews 13:11 Chinese Bible
Hebrews 13:11 French Bible
Hebrews 13:11 German Bible