¹sn Chap. 29 is a rather long, involved discussion of the consecration of Aaron the priest. It is similar to the ordination service in Lev 8. In fact, the execution of what is instructed here is narrated there. But these instructions must have been formulated after or in conjunction with Lev 1-7, for they presuppose a knowledge of the sacrifices. The bulk of the chapter is the consecration of the priests: 1-35. It has the preparation (1-3), washing (4), investiture and anointing (5-9), sin offering (10-14), burnt offering (15-18), installation peace offering (19-26, 31-34), other offerings’ rulings (27-30), and the duration of the ritual (35). Then there is the consecration of the altar (36,37), and the oblations (38-46). There are many possibilities for the study and exposition of this material. The whole chapter is the consecration of tabernacle, altar, people, and most of all the priests. God was beginning the holy operations with sacral ritual. So the overall message would be: Everyone who ministers, everyone who worships, and everything they use in the presence of Yahweh, must be set apart to God by the cleansing, enabling, and sanctifying work of God.
²tn Heb “the thing.”
³tn Literally: “take one bull, a ‘son’ of the herd.”
⁴tn The word <ym!T* (tamim) means “perfect.” The animals could not have diseases or be crippled or blind (see Mal 1). The requirement was designed to ensure that the people would give the best they had to Yahweh. The typology pointed to the sinless Messiah who would fulfill all these sacrifices in his one sacrifice on the cross.
⁵sn This will be for the minha offering (Lev 2) which was to accompany the animal sacrifices.
⁶tn Or “anointed.”
⁷tn The “fine flour” is here an adverbial accusative, explaining the material from which these items were made. The flour is to be finely sifted, and from the wheat, not the barley, which was often the material used by the poor. Fine flour, no leaven, and perfect animals, without blemishes, were to be gathered for this service.
⁸tn The verb brq (qarab) in the Hiphil means to “bring near” to the altar, or, to offer something to God. These gifts will, therefore, be offered to him for the service of this ritual.
⁹tn Heb “and with.”
¹⁰tn Here too the verb is the Hiphil (now imperfect) meaning “bring near” the altar. The choice of this verb indicates that they were not merely being brought near, but that they were being formally presented to Yahweh as the offerings were.
¹¹sn This is the washing referred to in Lev 8:6. This is a complete washing, and not just of the hands and feet that would follow in the course of service. It had to serve as a symbolic ritual cleansing or purifying as the initial stage in the consecration. The imagery of washing will be used in the NT for regeneration (Titus 3:5).
¹²tn The Hiphil of vbl (labas), “to clothe,” will take double accusatives; so the sign of the accusative is with Aaron, and then with the articles of clothing. The translation will have to treat Aaron as the direct object, and the articles as indirect objects, because Aaron receives the prominence in the verse—you will clothe Aaron.
¹³tn The verb used in this last clause is a denominative verb from the word for ephod. The verb can only mean “to fasten as an ephod.” And so “ephod the ephod on him” means “fasten as an ephod the ephod on him” (Driver, 316).
¹⁴sn This term does not appear in chap. 28, but it can only refer to the platelet that was tied around the turban with the inscription on it. Here it is called a “holy diadem,” a diadem that is distinctly set apart for this service. All the clothing was described as “holy garments,” and so they were all meant to mark the separation of the priests to this holy service. The items of clothing all were intended for different aspects of ministry, and so this step in the consecration was designed to symbolize being set apart for those duties, or, prepared (gifted) to perform the ministry.
¹⁵sn The act of anointing was meant to set him apart for this holy service within the house of Yahweh. The psalms indicate that no oil was spared in this ritual, for it ran down his beard and to the hem of his garment. Oil of anointing was used for all major offices (giving the label with the passive adjective “masiah” (or “messiah”) to anyone anointed. In the further revelation of Scripture, the oil came to signify the enablement as well as the setting apart, and so often the Holy Spirit came on the person at the anointing with oil. The olive oil was a symbol of the Spirit in the OT as well (Zech 4:4-6). And in the NT “anointing” signifies empowerment by the Holy Spirit for service.
¹⁶tc Hebrew has both the objective pronoun “them” and the names “Aaron and his sons.” Neither the LXX nor Leviticus 8:13 has “Aaron and his sons,” suggesting that this may have been a later gloss in the text.
¹⁷tn Heb “and you will consecrate,” the verb draws together the individual acts of the process.
¹⁸tn Heb “fill the hand” and so “ordain.”
¹⁹tn The verb is singular, agreeing with the first of the compound subject—Aaron.
²⁰sn The details of these offerings have to be determined from a careful study of Leviticus. There is a good deal of debate over the meaning of laying hands on the animals. At the very least it identifies the animal formally as their sacrifice. But it may very well indicate that the animal is a substitute for them as well, given the nature and the effect of the sacrifices.
²¹sn This act seemed to signify the efficacious nature of the blood, since the horns represented power. This is part of the ritual of the sin offering for laity, because before the priests become priests they are treated as laity. The offering is better described as a purification offering rather than a sin offering, because it was offered according to Leviticus for both sins and impurities. Moreover, it was offered primarily to purify the sanctuary so that the once-defiled or sinful person could enter (see J. Milgrom, Leviticus).
²²tn The phrase “rest of” has been supplied in the translation for clarification.
²³tn Driver suggests that this is the appendix or an appendix, both here and in v. 22 (p. 320). “The surplus, the appendage of liver, found with cow, sheep, or goat, but not with humans: Lobus caudatus” (HALOT s.v. trty).
²⁴tn Heb “turn [them] into sweet smoke” since the word is used for burning incense.
sn The giving of the visceral organs and the fat has received various explanations. The fat represented the best, and the best was to go to God. If the animal is a substitute then the visceral organs represent the will of the worshiper in an act of surrender to God.
²⁵sn This is to be done because there is no priesthood yet. Once they are installed, then the sin/purification offering is to be eaten by the officiating priests as a sign that the offering was received. But priests could not consume their own sin offering.
²⁶sn There were two kinds, those made with confession for sin, and those made without. The title needs to cover both of them, and if it is called in the traditional way the sin offering, that will convey that when people offered it for skin diseases, menstruation, or having babies, they had sinned. That was not the case. Moreover, it is usual to translate the names of the sacrifices by what they do more than what they cover—so peace offering, reparation offering, and purification offering.
²⁷tn Heb “turn to sweet smoke.”
²⁸sn According to Lev 1 the burnt offering (often called whole burnt offering, except that the skins were usually given to the priests for income) was an atoning sacrifice. By consuming the entire animal, God was indicating that he had completely accepted the worshiper; and as it was a sweet smelling fire sacrifice, he was indicating that he was pleased to accept it. By killing the entire animal, the worshiper was indicating on his part a complete surrender to God.
²⁹tn The word hV#a! (‘isseh) has traditionally been translated “an offering made with fire” or the like, because it appears so obviously connected with fire. But further evidence from Ugaritic suggests that it might only mean “a gift” (see Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, 161).
³⁰sn These sections show that the priest had to be purified or cleansed from defilement of sin and also be atoned for and accepted by the Lord through the blood of the sacrifice. The principles from these two sacrifices should be basic to anyone seeking to serve God.
³¹sn By this ritual the priests were set apart completely to the service of God. The ear represented the organ of hearing (as in “ears you have dug” in Ps 40 or “awakens my ear” in Isa 50), and this had to be set apart to God so that they could hear the Word of God. The thumb and the hand represented the instrument to be used for all ministry, and so everything that they “put their hand to” had to be dedicated to God and appropriate for his service. The toe set the foot apart to God, meaning that the walk of the priest had to be consecrated—where he went, how he conducted himself, what life he lived, all belonged to God now.
³²tn “it” has been supplied.
³³tn The verb in this instance is the Qal and not the Piel, “to be holy” rather than “sanctify.” The result of all this ritual is that Aaron and his sons will be set aside and distinct in their life and their service.
³⁴tn Driver suggests that this is the appendix or an appendix, both here and in v. 13 (p. 320). “The surplus, the appendage of liver, found with cow, sheep, or goat, but not with humans: Lobus caudatus” (HALOT s.v. trty).
³⁵tn Heb “filling.”
³⁶tn Heb “all.”
³⁷tn Heb “the palms.”
³⁸tn The “wave offering” is hp*WnT= (t^enupa); it is, of course, cognate with the verb, but an adverbial accusative rather than the direct object. In Lev 23 this seems to be a sacrificial gesture of things that are for the priests—but they present them first to Yahweh and then receive them back from him. So the waving is not side to side, but forward to Yahweh and then back to the priest. Here it is just an induction into that routine, for as this is the ordination of the priests, the gifts are not yet theirs. So this will all be burnt up on the altar.
³⁹tn “turn to sweet smoke.”
⁴⁰tn “them” has been supplied.
⁴¹sn These are the two special priestly offerings: the wave offering (from the verb “to wave”) and the “presentation offering” [old: heave offering] (from a verb “to be high” in the Hiphil meaning “to lift up” and separated from the offering, a contribution). The two are then clarified with two corresponding relative clauses with the two Hophals in them: “which was waved and which was presented.” In making sacrifices, the breast and the thigh belong to the priests.
⁴²tn “share” has been added for clarification.
⁴³tn The construction is the infinitive construct with the lamed preposition. The form simply means “for anointing,” but it serves to express the purpose or result of their inheriting the sacred garments.
⁴⁴tn This form is the Piel infinitive construct with the lamed preposition. It literally reads “for filling the hands,” the idiom used throughout this chapter for ordination or installation. Here too it has a parallel use of purpose or result.
⁴⁵tn Heb “after him.”
⁴⁶tn The text just has the relative pronoun and the imperfect tense. It could be translated “who comes/enters.” But the context seems to indicate that this would be when he first comes to the Tent to begin his tenure as High Priest, and so a temporal clause makes this clear. “First” has been supplied.
⁴⁷tn “Seven days” is an adverbial accusative of time. The ritual of ordination is to be repeated for seven days, and so they are to remain there in the court in full dress.
⁴⁸tn Or “boil” (see Lev 8:31).
⁴⁹sn The “holy place” must be in the courtyard of the sanctuary. Lev 8:31 says it is to be cooked at the entrance of the tent of meeting. Here it says it will be eaten there as well. This, then, becomes a communion sacrifice, a peace offering which was a shared meal. The significance of eating the communal meal in a holy place was meant to signify that the worshipers and the priests were at peace with God.
⁵⁰tn The clause is a relative clause modifying “them,” the direct object of the verb. The relative clause has a resumptive pronoun: “which atonement was made by them” becomes “by which atonement was made.” The verb is the Pual perfect of rP@K! (kipper), “to expiate, atone, pacify.”
⁵¹tn The Hebrew word is “stranger, alien” (rz [zar]). But in this context it means anyone who is not a priest (see Driver, 324).
⁵²tn “Ordination offerings” (Heb “fillings”).
⁵³tn The verb in the conditional clause is the Niphal imperfect of rty (yatar); this verb is repeated in the next clause (as a Niphal participle) as the direct object of the verb “you will burn” ( a Qal perfect with a vav consecutive to form the instruction).
⁵⁴tn The verb is the Niphal imperfect negated. It expresses the prohibition against eating this, but in the passive voice: “it will not be eaten,” or stronger, “it must not be eaten.”
⁵⁵tn Heb “you will fill their hand.”
⁵⁶tn The “seven days” is the adverbial accusative explaining that the ritual of the filling should continue daily for a week. Leviticus makes it clear that they are not to leave the sanctuary.
⁵⁷tn The construction uses a genitive: “a bull of the sin offering,” which means, a bull that is designated for a sin (or better, purification) offering.
⁵⁸sn It is difficult to understand how this verse is to be harmonized with the other passages. The ceremony in the earlier passages deals with atonement made for the priests, for people. But here it is the altar that is being sanctified. The “sin [purification] offering” as mentioned earlier is more of a purification of the sanctuary and altar to receive people in their worship.
⁵⁹tn The verb is t*aF@j!w+ (w^ehitte’ta), the Piel perfect of the word usually translated “to sin.” Here it may be interpreted as a privative Piel (as in Ps 51:7 [9]), with the sense of “un-sin” or “remove sin.” It could also be interpreted as related to the word for “sin offering,” and so be a denominative verb. It means “to purify, cleanse.” The Hebrews understood that sin and contamination could corrupt and pollute even things; and so they had to be purged.
⁶⁰tn The construction is the Piel infinitive construct in an adverbial clause. The preposition bet that begins the clause could be taken as a temporal preposition, but in this context it seems to express the means by which the altar was purged of contamination— “in your making atonement” is “by [your] making atonement.”
⁶¹tn Once again this is an adverbial accusative or time. Each day for seven days the ritual at the altar is to be followed.
⁶²tn The construction is the superlative genitive: “holy of holies,” or “most holy.” This is the priest’s description of the innermost room in the tabernacle, the Most Holy Place, or as it is literally and traditionally rendered, the “Holy of Holies.”
⁶³sn This line states an unusual principle, meant to preserve the sanctity of the altar. Driver explains it this way (p. 325): If anything comes in contact with the altar, it becomes holy and must remain in the sanctuary for Yahweh’s use. If a person touches the altar, he likewise becomes holy and cannot return to the profane regions. He will be given over to God to be dealt with as God pleases. Anyone who was not qualified to touch the altar did not dare approach it, for contact would have meant that he was no longer free to leave but was God’s holy possession—and might pay for it with his life (see Exod 30:29; Lev 6:18b, 27; and Ezek 46:20).
⁶⁴tn The verb is “you will do, make.” It clearly refers to offering the animals on the altar, but may emphasize all the preparation that was involved in the process.
⁶⁵tn Or “at twilight” (late afternoon).
⁶⁶tn The phrase “of an ephah” has been supplied for clarity (cf. Num 28:5). The ephah was a commonly used dry measure whose capacity is now uncertain: “Quotations given for the ephah vary from ca. 45 to 20 liters” (C. Houtman, Exodus, 2:340-41).
⁶⁷tn “Hin” is a transliterated Hebrew word that seems to have an Egyptian derivation. The amount of liquid measured by a hin is uncertain: “Its presumed capacity varies from about 3,5 liters to 7,5 liters” (C. Houtman, Exodus, 3:550).
⁶⁸tn The translation again should have “regular” instead of “continually,” because they will be preparing this twice a day.
⁶⁹tn The relative clause identifies the place in front of the Tent as the place that Yahweh would meet Moses. The main verb of the clause is du@Wa! (‘iwwa’ed), the Niphal imperfect of the verb duy (ya’ad), the verb that is cognate to the name “tent of meeting”—hence the name. This clause leads into the next four verses.
⁷⁰tn The verb now is the Niphal perfect from the same root, with the vav consecutive. It simply continues the preceding verb, announcing now that he would meet the people.
⁷¹sn The tabernacle, as well as the priests and the altar, will be sanctified by the power of Yahweh’s presence. The reference here is to when Yahweh enters the sanctuary in all his glory (see Exod 40:34f.).
⁷²tn This verse affirms the same point as the last, but now with an active verb: “I will sanctify.” This verse, then, probably introduces the conclusion of the chapter: “So I will….”
⁷³tn The verb is the root /kv (sakan), from which came the word for “sanctuary” (/K*v=m! [miskan]). It is also used for the description of “the Shekinah glory.” God is affirming that he will reside in the midst of his people.