The document provides a commentary on Leviticus 16, detailing the Day of Atonement and the instructions given to Moses regarding the high priest's rituals following the deaths of Aaron's sons. It emphasizes the importance of approaching God with reverence and outlines the procedures for atonement, including the sacrificial offerings and the role of the two goats. The text reflects on the spiritual significance of these practices in maintaining the sanctity of the priesthood and the nation of Israel.

1. LEVITICUS 16 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
The Day of Atonement
1 The Lord spoke to Moses after the death of the
two sons of Aaron who died when they
approached the Lord.
BARNES, "The reference to the death of Nadab and Abihu is a notice of the occasion
on which the instructions were given, well calculated to add point and emphasis to the
solemn admonition to the high priest in the second verse. The death of his sons Lev_
10:2, for drawing near to Yahweh in an unauthorized manner, was to serve as a warning
to Aaron himself never to transgress in this respect.
CLARKE, "After the death of the two sons of Aaron - It appears from this
verse that the natural place of this chapter is immediately after the tenth, where
probably it originally stood; but the transposition, if it did take place, must be very
ancient, as all the versions acknowledge this chapter in the place in which it now stands.
GILL, "And the Lord spake unto Moses, after the death of the two sons of
Aaron,.... That is, either immediately after their death, and so this chapter would have
stood in its natural order next to the tenth; or else after the above laws concerning
uncleanness on various accounts were delivered out, designed to prevent the people
entering into the tabernacle defiled, whereby they would have incurred the penalty of
death; wherefore, as Aben Ezra observes, after the Lord had given cautions to the
Israelites, that they might not die, he bid Moses to caution Aaron also, that he might not
die as his sons died; these were Nadab and Abihu:
when they offered before the Lord, and died; offered strange fire, and died by
flaming fire, as the Targum of Jonathan; or fire sent down from heaven, as Gersom, by
lightning; see Lev_10:1.
HENRY, "Here is, I. The date of this law concerning the day of atonement: it was
after the death of the two sons of Aaron (Lev_16:1), which we read, Lev_10:1. 1. Lest
1

2. Aaron should fear that any remaining guilt of that sin should cleave to his family, or
(seeing the priests were so apt to offend) that some after-sin of his other sons should be
the ruin of his family, he is directed how to make atonement for his house, that it might
keep in with God; for the atonement for it would be the establishment of it, and preserve
the entail of the blessing upon it. 2. The priests being warned by the death of Nadab and
Abihu to approach to God with reverence and godly fear (without which they came at
their peril), directions are here given how the nearest approach might be made, not only
without peril, but to unspeakable advantage and comfort, if the directions were
observed. When they were cut off for an undue approach, the rest must not say, “Then
we will not draw near at all,” but, “Then we will do it by rule.” They died for their sin,
therefore God graciously provides for the rest, that they die not. Thus God's judgments
on some should be instructions to others.
JAMISON, "Lev_16:1-34. How the High Priest must enter into the Holy Place.
after the death of the two sons of Aaron, when they offered before the
Lord, and died — It is thought by some that this chapter has been transposed out of its
right place in the sacred record, which was immediately after the narrative of the deaths
of Nadab and Abihu [Lev_10:1-20]. That appalling catastrophe must have filled Aaron
with painful apprehensions lest the guilt of these two sons might be entailed on his
house, or that other members of his family might share the same fate by some
irregularities or defects in the discharge of their sacred functions. And, therefore, this
law was established, by the due observance of whose requirements the Aaronic order
would be securely maintained and accepted in the priesthood.
K&D, "The chronological link connecting the following law with the death of the sons
of Aaron (Lev_10:1-5) was intended, not only to point out the historical event which led
to the appointment of the day of atonement, but also to show the importance and
holiness attached to an entrance into the inmost sanctuary of God. The death of Aaron's
sons, as a punishment for wilfully “drawing near before Jehovah,” was to be a solemn
warning to Aaron himself, “not to come at all times into the holy place within the vail,
before the mercy-seat upon the ark,” i.e., into the most holy place (see Exo_25:10.), but
only at the time to be appointed by Jehovah, and for the purposes instituted by Him, i.e.,
according to Lev_16:29., only once a year, on the day of atonement, and only in the
manner prescribed in Lev_16:3., that he might not die. - “For I will appear in the cloud
above the capporeth.” The cloud in which Jehovah appeared above the capporeth,
between the cherubim (Exo_25:22), was not the cloud of the incense, with which Aaron
was to cover the capporeth on entering (Lev_16:13), as Vitringa, Bähr, and others follow
the Sadducees in supposing, but the cloud of the divine glory, in which Jehovah
manifested His essential presence in the most holy place above the ark of the covenant.
Because Jehovah appeared in this cloud, not only could no unclean and sinful man go
before the capporeth, i.e., approach the holiness of the all-holy God; but even the
anointed and sanctified high priest, if he went before it at his own pleasure, or without
the expiatory blood of sacrifice, would expose himself to certain death. The reason for
this prohibition is to be found in the fact, that the holiness communicated to the priest
did not cancel the sin of his nature, but only covered it over for the performance of his
official duties, and so long as the law, which produced only the knowledge of sin and not
its forgiveness and removal, was not abolished by the complete atonement, the holy God
2

3. was and remained to mortal and sinful man a consuming fire, before which no one could
stand.
CALVIN, "1.And the Lord spake unto Moses. A copious description is here given of
what we have recently adverted to cursorily, as it were, i.e., the solemn atonement
which was yearly made in the seventh month; for when Moses was instructing them
as to what sacrifices were to be offered on each of the festivals, he expressly
excepted, though only in a single word, this sacrifice, where he spoke of the day of
atonement itself, on which they afflicted their souls. Now, therefore, a clear and
distinct exposition of it is separately given. For although at other seasons of the year
also both their public and private sins were expiated, and for this purpose availed
the daily sacrifices, still this more solemn rite was meant to arouse the people’s
minds, that they might more earnestly apply themselves all the year through to the
diligent seeking for pardon and remission. In order, then, that they might be more
anxious to propitiate God, one atonement was performed at the end of the year
which might ratify all the others. But, that they might more diligently observe what
is commanded, Moses makes mention of the time in which the Law was given, viz.,
when Nadab and Abihu were put to death by God, after they had rashly defiled the
altar by their negligence.
COFFMAN, "In this chapter we stand upon the summit of Moses' law, where, in the
most impressive ritual of the entire system, the Judaic High Priest performed an
atonement for Israel, the same being an inspired shadow of that Greater High
Priest, our Lord Jesus Christ, who would give his life as a propitiation for the sins of
the whole world! (1 John 2:2). The Jews still observe this day which falls upon the
tenth day of their first month of the year, Tishri, the same being the seventh month
of their religious year, the very numbers of these months symbolizing the truth that
the Atonement marks the beginning of Israel's national life and the fruition and
completeness (the seventh month) of their religious life.
"Yom Kippur" is the name which the Jews have given this day. [~Yowm] means
day; and [~Kippur] refers to the mercy-seat, a translation given by William Tyndale
to the word for the lid or covering of the Ark of Covenant, the [~kappereth], which
in a figure means the covering of sins, or atonement. In Hebrew writings, the day is
sometimes called simply [~Yoma], meaning "The Day."
Critical writers profess dissatisfaction with the placement of this chapter. They
would have put it somewhere else! But, as Seiss expressed it, "Its proper place seems
to be exactly where God put it."[1] The theological point of departure for this
chapter was accurately discerned and convincingly presented by Gordon J.
Wenham, a highly-respected, present-day scholar:
(Paraphrase). It began in Leviticus 10, referred to from the outset here, where the
death of two of Aaron's sons demonstrated the wrath of God against all who dared
3

4. to approach God improperly. The intervening chapters (Leviticus 11-15) gave
careful instructions regarding what was or was not clean, and the next logical and
necessary step is taken here in Leviticus 16, where the proper procedure must be
observed by the High Priest to preserve him and the other priests from a fate like
that of Nadab and Abihu.[2]
However, much more than the preservation of the lives of the priests is involved.
The elaborate rules for cleanness in Leviticus 11-15 demonstrated the absolute
certainty that all people would at times be "unclean," that their unworthiness to
approach God was, in a sense, constant, that this would of necessity contaminate the
very articles and structure of the tabernacle itself, and that even those sacred items
thus contaminated would need to be purified, or to have an atonement made for
them, the same being one of the great purposes discernible here. (See Leviticus
16:16ff). Along with this, there also appears the purpose of taking away the sins of
Israel itself. Surely, we stand at the heart of the O.T. system right here.
One of the most amazing things regarding the Day of Atonement is the scarcity of
mention of it throughout the O.T. The historical books paid little or no attention to
it, and the observance of it was apparently suspended entirely, along with the rite of
circumcision, during the time of the journeys in the wilderness. Only a few of the
specific occasions of its observance are found in the whole Bible. These facts, of
course, have set the critical community in a frenzy of desire to make this chapter "a
later intrusion" into the sacred record, or of a much later date than the times of
Moses, or any other postulation that might be pressed into the service of their
assault upon the Scriptures. The scarcity of Biblical reference to Israel's observance
of this day, however, is typical. There are a number of the most important events in
the O.T., and precisely some of those that are the most prophetic witnesses of Jesus
Christ that are mentioned only one time. For example, the deployment of the story
of Melchizedek in Genesis 14, is the basis of several chapters in the Book of
Hebrews, despite the fact of there being no other reference whatever to Melchizedek
in the O.T. (except in Psalms 110:4). The Passover itself is also distinguished in that
only four or five occasions of this actual observance by Israel may be found in the
Bible, including that of Josiah.
THE DAY OF ATONEMENT
Summary of Procedures:
(1) The High Priest came to the Holy Place with a young bullock for a sin-offering,
and a ram for a burnt-offering (Leviticus 16:3).
(2) He bathed himself all over (Leviticus 16:4).
(3) He put on, after divesting himself of his High Priestly regalia, the pure white
linen garments, even less ornate than that of the ordinary priests. Not as a semi-
royal person clothed in his full authority and dignity, but as a servant he would
4

5. perform his duties (Leviticus 16:4).
(4) He received from the people two he-goats for a sin-offering and one ram for a
burnt-offering. Note that the two goats were but one offering, a sin-offering
(Leviticus 16:5).
(5) He offered the bullock as a sin-offering for himself and "his house," meaning all
the priesthood (Leviticus 16:6), following the regulations in Leviticus 4.
(6) He offered the two goats "before Jehovah," at the door of the tent of meeting
(Leviticus 16:7). This is an emphatic declaration that both goats were here presented
to God Himself.
(7) He cast lots for the goats, not to determine who was to receive them, that having
already been decided and stated in Leviticus 16:7, but for the purpose of
determining which goat would serve in which phase of their dual offering to
Jehovah. (Leviticus 16:8).
(8) He offered the goat as a sin-offering that was identified by the lot (Leviticus
16:9), meaning that phase of this particular sin-offering, since both goats were part
of that one sin-offering to Jehovah (Leviticus 16:5).
(9) He received instructions regarding the other goat which was to be sent away as
"the remover of sin" (Leviticus 16:10).
(10) Having already killed the bullock which was the sin-offering for himself and his
house (recapitulated in Leviticus 16:11), he took a censer full of live coals from the
altar and his hands full of sweet incense and went to the veil through which the Holy
of Holies would be entered (Leviticus 16:12).
(11) He entered within the veil (Leviticus 16:12).
(12) He put the incense upon the fire (which he brought inside in the censer)
producing a thick cloud of smoke from the incense (Leviticus 16:13), sufficient to
cover the mercy-seat, so that he would not die.
(13) He sprinkled the blood of the bullock (Leviticus 16:11) seven times on the
mercy-seat on the east side (the front side). "Upon the mercy-seat," and "before the
mercy-seat" would mean that the blood was sprinkled twice seven times (Leviticus
16:14).
(14) He then killed one of the goats of the sin-offering, as determined by the lot
(Leviticus 16:15).
(15) He then repeated, in full, the procedures recounted above in (11) and (12),
entering within the veil with live coals and the sweet incense (Leviticus 16:15), and
5

6. sprinkling the blood seven times upon the mercy-seat and seven times before it. The
blood sprinkled here was that of the first goat offered as one-half of the sin-offering
of the people.
(16) He then, through the device of sprinkling blood of the people's sin-offering,
made atonement for the Holy Place, the larger sanctuary of the tabernacle
(Leviticus 16:16), the same being one of the great purposes of the whole Day of
Atonement.
(17) He then, alone, with even the whole area of the Holy Place being cleared of any
observers, entered the Holy of Holies (the 3time) and completed the atonement for
himself, his house, and all the people of Israel (Leviticus 16:17).
(18) He then left the Holy of Holies and went into the Holy Place where a special
atonement service for the great altar was performed by the sprinkling of the blood
upon the horns of it (Leviticus 16:18,19).
(19) The atonement was extended to include the tent of meeting in its entirety. And
when Aaron had finished with this, "he presented the live goat" (Leviticus 16:20).
To whom? To the Devil? Certainly not! He presented it to God. It was already
God's, having been designated so from the moment of its being brought "before
Jehovah" (Leviticus 16:7). We are outraged and disgusted by the critical nonsense
about this goat's being for a demon, or the Devil, named Azazel. Allegations to that
effect are examples of criticism having gone absolutely insane!
(20) Aaron then laid his hands upon the heads of the live goat and confessed "all the
iniquities ... all their transgressions ... even all their sins, putting them on the head of
the goat" (Leviticus 16:21).
(21) He then, by the hand of a special messenger, dispatched the goat, bearing all the
sins of Israel into a "land that is cut off," where it was commanded that the goat be
released (Leviticus 16:22).
These twenty-one specific steps (the sacred number three multiplied by the sacred
number seven) constituted the ceremonies of the Day of Atonement. The balance of
the chapter merely records the various "mopping up" activities after the ceremonies
were concluded. Aaron, after concluding the ceremonies, came out, bathed himself,
changed to High Priestly regalia, offered, the burnt-offerings for himself and for the
people, making atonement and concluding the observance of the instructions for the
sin-offerings as given in Leviticus 4. Also, the messenger who had led the goat away
and the ones who carried the remains of the sacrifices "without the camp" washed
their clothes and bathed themselves (Leviticus 16:23-28). The concluding paragraph
of the chapter (Leviticus 16:19-34) called for the observance of this Day of
Atonement throughout the history of the Chosen Nation, providing for a solemn fast
on that Day, the same being the only fast commanded by God in the entire O.T.
6

7. "And Jehovah spake unto Moses, after the death of the two sons of Aaron, when
they drew near before Jehovah, and died; and Jehovah said unto Moses, Speak unto
Aaron thy brother, that he come not at all times into the holy place within the veil,
before the mercy-seat which is upon the ark; that he die not: for I will appear in the
cloud upon the mercy-seat. Herewith shall Aaron come into the holy place: with a
young bullock for a sin-offering, and a ram for a burnt-offering. He shall put on the
holy linen coat, and he shall have the linen breeches upon his flesh, and shall be
girded with the linen girdle, and with the linen mitre shall he be attired: they are the
holy garments; and he shall bathe his flesh in water, and put them on. And he shall
take of the congregation of the children of Israel two he-goats for a sin-offering, and
one ram for a burnt-offering."
In his office as High Priest, Aaron was a type of the Son of God himself, our Great
High priest. Of course, there were inevitably some great dissimilarities. Jesus had no
need to offer sacrifices for himself, as did Aaron, but in other particulars there is an
amazing correspondence. It will be remembered that Jesus, being first arrayed in
that gorgeous purple, scarlet, and (perhaps also) blue robe, had it stripped from him
prior to the crucifixion, and was clothed again with his own clothes which were of a
very humble variety, even as were those which Aaron wore here after having been
divested of the formal dress of the High Priest. There was also another distinction:
"When the high priest went into the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement, he
had to wear a simple linen garment without seams, a garment of the type Jesus wore
when he went to the Cross as our sacrifice (John 19:23,24)."[3]
Another analogy appears in the requirement that two he-goats were to constitute the
single sin-offering for the people. No single animal could have typified what Jesus
did for mankind in the removal of sin. He not only made the sacrifice in his death
for our sins, but he bore them away from us forever, exactly after the analogy of the
second goat, called the scapegoat. One animal could not have typified this, hence,
the requirement for two.
Still another analogy is seen in the fact that before Aaron entered upon this ministry
of Atonement on the sacred Day, he had to bathe himself, just as Jesus began his
ministry by being immersed of John in the Jordan river. Despite the blindness of
many commentators who cannot see this and never mention it, the striking analogy
is most certainly there. In all of these adjacent chapters, a similar thing is witnessed
in the release of one of two birds in certain sacrifices, the birds serving even
somewhat better than the scapegoat, in that they flew into the heavens, whereas the
goat merely wandered around in the wilderness.
It is interesting that all of the instructions for the priests here, even those for Aaron,
were not communicated to Aaron, but to Moses, who thus holds a place even
superior to that of Israel's high priest. "The peculiarly exalted role of Moses runs
through Exodus to Deuteronomy, and is evident here as well."[4]
7

8. The fact that Aaron's entry into the Holy of Holies was restricted to his performance
of these duties on the Day of Atonement was significant:
"Holiness communicated to Aaron did not cancel his sin, but only covered it for
the performance of his official duties. So long as the Law which produced a
knowledge of sin, but not its forgiveness, existed, the holy God was and remained to
mortal men a consuming fire."[5]
The fact of these Day of Atonement rituals having to be repeated every year "shows
that the question was not really settled."[6] Sins were not in any ultimate sense
forgiven, for, "There was a remembrance made of the sins year by year" (Hebrews
10:3), not merely of the sins committed since the last day of atonement, but all their
sins; note the emphatic triple mention of this in Leviticus 16:16 and Leviticus 16:21.
There were some remarkable differentiations in Aaron's attire for these sacred
duties that stressed the chasm between the priests of paganism, who are called three
times in the Sacred Text the [~chemarin], meaning "the BLACK-ROBED ones"
(Zephaniah 1:4; 2 Kings 23:5; and Hosea 10:5). Aaron was clad totally in WHITE
for these ceremonies, and particular mention of the WHITE linen breeches was
included.[7] Those breeches also carried a sharp repudiation of the conduct of the
priests of paganism, "Where ritual nakedness, especially for priests, was a feature of
some of their ancient religions."[8]
The simplicity and humility of Aaron's dress here showed, that when men appear
before God as sinners, "The highest and the lowest were on a level, for God is no
respecter of persons."[9] As a matter of fact, Wenham declared that, "On the Day of
Atonement, Aaron looked like a slave."[10] So he did, and Jesus fulfilled the picture
perfectly when, upon the night of his betrayal, he took a towel and girded himself
and washed the feet of his apostles (John 13:1-5)!
Our observation that the two goats (Leviticus 16:5) actually constituted only ONE
offering is corroborated by all conservative scholars. As Maclaren said, "They (the
two goats) are spoken of as constituting but ONE offering."[11]
Verse 6
"And Aaron shall present the bullock of the sin-offering, which is for himself, and
make atonement for himself, and for his house. And he shall take the two goats, and
set them before Jehovah at the door of the tent of meeting. And Aaron shall cast lots
upon the two goats; one lot for Jehovah, and the other lot for Azazel. And Aaron
shall present the goat upon whom the lot fell for Jehovah, and offer him for a sin-
offering. But the goat, on which the lot fell for Azazel, shall set alive before Jehovah,
to make atonement for him, to send him away for Azazel into the wilderness."
"Aaron shall cast lots ..." Jamieson described this procedure thus:
"The priest placed one of the goats on his right hand, and the other on his left.
8

9. Two pieces of gold exactly alike, inscribed "for Jehovah" and "for Azazel" were
then placed in a bag or covered box, and the priest placed both hands inside and
took out both pieces, one in each hand. That in his right hand he placed on the head
of the goat on that side, and that in his left hand on the other goat's head. This
determined the fate of each."[12]
"Azazel ..." The capitalization of this word making a proper name out of it is
ridiculous, such being a work entirely of man, not of God, and it is rejected here
categorically as extremely ridiculous. The basis for this corrupt translation comes
principally from two arguments:
(1) The Hebrew word for [~`aza'zel] has no article ([~la-`aza'zel]); so, from this, it is
alleged by commentators who don't know their grammar that it must refer to a
person, but as Meyrick pointed out, theirs "is a grammatical error." "When a noun
expresses an office or a function, it does NOT require a definite article in Hebrew
any more than it does in French."[13] Meyrick cited half a dozen Biblical references
confirming this.
(2) The second argument is somewhat more convincing, but still wrong. "There is, of
course, a great likelihood that when two phrases, `for the Lord' and `for something
else' are set in contrast with each other that, if the first refers to a person, then so
also does the second. But it is an incredibly rash assertion that this is always the
case."[14] The instance here is one in which it is impossible for that to be the case.
Moses did not write in a strait-jacket, restricted and smothered by all the rules that
grammarians observe. And it has been the mark of great men in all ages that the
rules never failed to get kicked around somewhat in their writings and lectures. We
think of that instance when Sir Winston Churchill was heard to end a sentence with
a preposition, upon which a critic pointed out what he considered an error. The
incomparable Churchill froze his critic with a stare and replied, "Indeed, indeed!
This is bastard English, up with which I will not put!" Those who overheard it,
declared that a belly laugh put the critic to shame and left Churchill's "error"
uncorrected. The same kind of belly laugh is deserved by the "Azazel" rendition.
Think of the implications of this, if it could be accepted as correct. The critics
themselves have spelled it out for us:
"The most popular explanation among commentators is that Azazel is the name of
a demon that lived in the wilderness.[15] Azazel was the name of something that was
the opposite of God. This means that we should identify him as the chief of the
forces of evil, hence, the Devil.[16] He was probably some demon of the desert.[17]
Azazel is understood to be the name of one of those malignant demons with which
the superstition of the Israelites peopled the wilderness and all waste places."[18]
Well, there you have it! This particular example of scholarly "fembu" leads to the
acceptance of the most bizarre and preposterous declarations ever advanced by so-
called "believers in Christ." Can such men actually accept the proposition that on
9

10. the great Day of Atonement itself, one of the principal features of it was a sacrifice
to the Devil! Men should reject such notions, not with cautious scholarly reserve,
but with the same blunt denial that the advocates of this rendition make of the
whole Word of God. The Lord specifically forbade the recognition of any evil power
(Leviticus 17:7). How can it be thought that God Himself recognized the Devil here
by sending him a sacrifice, in fact sharing with him, on a share and share alike
basis, the sin-offering of Israel? The discernment of Maclaren in this was correct:
"It is surely sacrificing a great deal to rhetorical propriety to drag in an idea so
foreign to the Pentateuch, and so opposed to the plain fact that both goats were one
sin-offering (Leviticus 16:5), just in order to get a pedantically correct antithesis.[19]
What then, is the correct rendition for the word here given as Azazel? We are happy
to note that Meyrick has not only answered this but justified and defended it with
the most thorough discussion of the whole question that may be found anywhere. He
rendered the passage: "And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the
Lord, and one lot for a remover of sins."[20] In this rendition is also the apparent
reason for the difficulty of putting this thought into language. The words "for the
Lord" and "for the remover of sins" do not apply to the Lord and some other
person, but to the two goats and the diverse functions each played in the sin offering
of Israel. In the Bible, especially in the N.T., there are many examples where
grammatical constructions cannot convey the truth at all. For example, Christ is
spoken of as THE BEING; THE WAS, and THE COMING! This is the literal
rendition of the Greek text of Revelation 1:4.[21] It is not grammatical in either
Greek or English. And Moffatt stated, "This is a deliberate violation of grammar to
preserve the immutability and absoluteness of the divine name."[22] The same kind
of violation of the pedantic rules of rhetoric is discernible in Leviticus 16:8. (See
further discussion of the false word Azazel at end of this chapter.)
COKE, ". And the Lord spake unto Moses, after the death of the two sons of
Aaron— The death of the sons of Aaron giving occasion for the declaration of the
before-mentioned laws; (see ch. Leviticus 10:10 and ch. 11:) they are here inserted,
and are to be read as in a parenthesis; and the present chapter is to be considered as
in natural dependence upon the tenth.
ELLICOTT, "(1) And the Lord spake unto Moses.—As the observance of the
minute regulations given in the preceding chapters about the daily sacrifices and
purifications would necessarily be tainted with many imperfections and
shortcomings, both on the part of the mediating priests and the offering laity, a
general day of atonement is here instituted, when priest and people are alike to
obtain atonement once a year for the sins which were mixed up even with their
sacred worship. The day of atonement enacted in the chapter before us is therefore
an appropriate conclusion of the laws of purification in the preceding chapters. It is
an annual supplement and completion of all the ordinances which were daily
practised, and the design of which was to obtain atonement and reconciliation.
10

11. After the death of the two sons of Aaron.—That is, after Nadab and Abihu, his two
eldest sons, had died, in consequence of having presumptuously entered the
sanctuary in a profane manner, and at an irregular time. (See Leviticus 10:1-2.)
PETT, "Introduction
Chapter 16 The Great Day of Atonement.
We now come to a description of that great Day to which all that has gone before
looked forward, Israel’s great Day of Atonement. Once every year this Day was to
take place in order to cancel out all of the past sins and uncleannesses of Israel that
had occurred since the previous Day of Atonement that were not already seen as
fully atoned for. All that remained unatoned for, whether secret or public, would be
dealt with on this Day. Israel would, as it were, begin the coming year with a clean
sheet.
This in itself spells out the failure of past offerings and sacrifices to deal fully with
sin, and the fact that the Day of Atonement had to be kept every year demonstrated
that its effect too was temporary. But it was on that Day, and only on that Day, that
the High Priest was allowed to pass through the veil into the inner sanctuary of the
Holy of Holies in order to present the blood of offerings in the actual earthly
sanctum of Yahweh, His throne room.
The description of the Day fits aptly after the chapters on uncleanness. Five
chapters on uncleannesses prepare us for the significance of this day. Patterned on
Genesis they had spoken of what was clean and unclean, with regard to cattle, clean
birds and fish, unclean animals, unclean birds and sea creatures, and creeping
things with which men came in contact (Genesis 1-3); they had pointed to women in
childbirth suffering through Eve’s sin and producing children in uncleanness
(Genesis 3:16); to man’s sinfulness and uncleanness as portrayed in those with
suspicious skin diseases which meant that they were cast out of the camp as Adam
was cast out of the Garden (Genesis 3:17); to man’s clothing which covered his
nakedness (Genesis 3:21) and which could become defiled; to the resultant
triumphal return to God of the unclean (Genesis 4:4; Genesis 4:26) made possible by
God’s mercy; to the establishing of houses in a city (Genesis 4:17) which too could
become unclean; and to the fact that through death, resulting from the fact that man
was now a sinner, springs up life (Genesis 5). There would have been many
instances of uncleanness in the camp which had not been dealt with correctly and
fully, and may even have been hidden or overlooked, but all these would now be
covered by the Day of Atonement.
And after Genesis 5 was to come the great new beginning when the world was swept
clean of sin in the flood and man began again (Genesis 6-9). This was also the yearly
function of the Day of Atonement for Israel. Man in his uncleannesses could find
purification and atonement before God. The uncleannesses resulting from Genesis
1-5 and from constant failure to apply the laws of uncleannesses could be swept
11

12. away. And this along with all the sins of Israel that previous sacrifices had not been
able to atone for. It was the day of purification when the very presence of God was
itself approached.
The Day followed exactly six months after the setting aside of the lambs for the
Feast of the Passover, and was followed five days later by the Feast of
Tabernacles/Booths, but unlike the day of the setting aside of the Passover lambs
and of the three great feasts it was a day of solemnity and mourning for sin. It was
the supreme day of getting right with God. The acceptance of the offerings by God
on that day was seen as a symbol of hope for the future.
Verse 1
‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, after the death of the two sons of Aaron, when they
drew near before Yahweh, and died,’
These words of Moses are timed as taking place after the death of the two sons of
Aaron in Leviticus 10:1-2. They had drawn near before Yahweh and died because
they offered what was false and behaved foolishly. Now it was necessary that the
High Priest offered what was true, otherwise he too would die. But the laws of
uncleanness had previously been expounded on in order to fill out the need for this
day by stressing the daily uncleannesses of Israel. It explained how a holy God could
continue to ‘dwell’ in a camp of such uncleannesses. For in spite of the extreme
efforts made to preserve the holiness of the Sanctuary, it could not avoid being to
some extent tainted by surrounding and sometimes hidden and/or unconscious
uncleanness.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses after the death of the two
sons of Aaron, when they offered before the LORD, and died;
Ver. 1. After the death.] That others might be warned. Lege historiam, ne fias
historia, saith one.
When they offered before the Lord.] A little strange fire might seem a small matter
in the eyes of indifferency: and yet it was such a sin as made all Israel guilty, as
appears by the sacrifices offered for that sin, set down in this chapter.
PULPIT, "THE CEREMONIAL PURIFICATION OF THE WHOLE
CONGREGATION ON THE GREAT DAY OF ATONEMENT.
This chapter, containing the account of the institution of the ceremonial to be used
on the Day of Atonement, would take its place chronologically immediately after the
tenth chapter, for the instructions conveyed in it were delivered to Moses "after the
death of the two sons of Aaron, when they offered before the Lord and died"
(Leviticus 16:1), when the fate of Nadab and Abihu would naturally have led Aaron
to desire a more perfect knowledge than had as yet been imparted to him as to the
12

13. manner in which he was to present himself before the Lord. Logically it might either
occupy its present position, as being the great and culminating atoning and
cleansing ceremony, or it might be relegated to a place among the holy days in
Leviticus 23:1-44, where it is, in fact, shortly noticed. That it is placed here shows
that the most essential characteristic of the Day in the judgment of the legislator is
that of its serving as the occasion and the means of "making an atonement for the
holy sanctuary, and making an atonement for the tabernacle of the congregation,
and for the altar, and for making an atonement for the priests, and for all the people
of the congregation" (Leviticus 23:33).
Annually there gathered over the camp, and over the sanctuary as situated in the
midst of the camp, a mass of defilement, arising in part from sins whose guilt had
not been removed by the punishment of the offenders, and in part from
uncleannesses which had not been cleansed by sacrifices and the prescribed
ceremonial rites. Annually this defilement had to be atoned for or covered away
from the sight of God. This was done by the solemn observance of the great Day of
Atonement, and specially by the high priest's carrying the blood of the sacrifices
into the holy of holies, into which he might enter on no other day of the year; while
the consciousness of deliverance from the guilt of sin was quickened on the part of
the people by their seeing the scapegoat "bear away upon him all their iniquities
unto a land not inhabited" (Leviticus 23:22).
2 The Lord said to Moses: “Tell your brother
Aaron that he is not to come whenever he chooses
into the Most Holy Place behind the curtain in
front of the atonement cover on the ark, or else he
will die. For I will appear in the cloud over the
atonement cover.
BARNES, "The holy place within the vail - See Exo_26:33-34; Heb_9:3.
13

14. The cloud - Compare Exo_16:10 note.
The mercy seat - See Exo_25:17 note.
CLARKE, "That he come not at all times into the holy place - By the holy
place we are to understand here what is ordinarily called the Holy of Holies, or most holy
place; that place within the veil where the ark of the covenant, etc., were laid up; and
where God manifested his presence between the cherubim. In ordinary cases the high
priest could enter this place only once in the year, that is, on the day of annual
atonement; but in extraordinary cases he might enter more frequently, viz., while in the
wilderness, in decamping and encamping, he must enter to take down or adjust the
things; and on solemn pressing public occasions, he was obliged to enter in order to
consult the Lord: but he never entered without the deepest reverence and due
preparation. That it may appear that the grand subject of this chapter, the ordinance of
the scape-goat, typified the death and resurrection of Christ, and the atonement thereby
made, I beg leave to refer to Heb_9:7-12, and Heb_9:24-26, which I shall here
transcribe, because it is a key to the whole of this chapter. “Into the second [tabernacle]
went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for
himself, and for the errors of the people. The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way
into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet
standing: which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts
and sacrifices that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the
conscience; which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal
ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. But Christ being come, a
high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made
with hands, that is to say, not of this building; neither by the Blood of Goats and Calves,
but by his Own Blood; he entered into the holy place, having obtained eternal
redemption for us. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which
are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God
for us: nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy
place every year with the blood of others; (for then must he often have suffered since the
foundation of the world); but now once in the end of the world, hath he appeared To Put
Away Sin By The Sacrifice Of Himself.”
GILL, "And the Lord said unto Moses, speak unto Aaron thy brother,.... Who
was the high priest; and what is here said to him was binding on all high priests in
succession from him:
that he come not at all times into the holy place; or "holiness" (p), which was
holiness itself, or the most holy place, as distinguished from that which was sometimes
called the holy place, where stood the incense altar, the showbread table, and the
candlestick, into which Aaron went every day, morning and evening, to do the service
there enjoined him; but into the holy of holies here described, as appears by the after
description of it, he might not go at all times, or every day, or when he pleased, only once
a year, on the day of atonement; though, according to the Jewish writers, he went in four
times on that day, first to offer incense, a second time to sprinkle the blood of the
bullock, a third time to sprinkle the blood of the goat, and a fourth time to fetch out the
14

15. censer; and if he entered a fifth time, he was worthy of death (q). Some have observed
(r), that this respected Aaron only, and not Moses; that though Aaron might not go in
when he pleased, and only at a time fixed, yet Moses might at any time, and consult the
Lord upon the mercy seat, see Exo_25:22. Pausanias makes mention of several Heathen
temples which were opened but once a year, as the temples of Hades Dindymene, and
Eurymone (s), and particularly the temple of Minerva, into which only a priest entered
once a year (t); which perhaps was in imitation of the Jewish high priest:
within the vail, before the mercy seat, which is upon the ark; this is a
description of the holy place, into which the high priest might not go at any time, or at
pleasure; it was within the vail that divided between the holy place, and the most holy,
where stood the mercy seat, which was a lid or covering to the ark, at the two ends of
which were the cherubim, the seat of the divine Majesty; which was a type of heaven for
its holiness, being the habitation of the holy God, Father, Son, and Spirit, and of holy
angels, and holy men, and where only holy services are performed; and for its
invisibility, where dwells the invisible God, where Christ in our nature is at present
unseen by us, and the glories of which are not as yet to be beheld; only faith, hope, and
love, enter within the vail, and have to do with unseen objects there; and also for what
are in it, as the ark and mercy seat, types of Christ, through whom mercy is
communicated in a way of justice, he being the propitiation and the fulfilling end of the
law for righteousness. And this caution was given to Aaron:
that he die not; by appearing in the presence of God without his leave and order:
for I will appear in the cloud upon the mercy seat; this one would think should
be a reason why he should not die, when he came into the most holy place, because there
was the mercy seat, and Jehovah on it: and besides the cloud of incense on it, he went in
with, for so many understand by the cloud, the cloud of incense: thus Aben Ezra says,
the sense is, that he should not enter but with incense, which would make a cloud, and
so the glory not be seen, lest he should die: and Jarchi observes, that the Midrash, or the
more mystical and subtle sense is, he shall not go in but with the cloud of incense on the
day of atonement; but the more simple meaning, or plain sense of the words is, as the
same writer notes, that whereas he did continually appear there in the pillar of cloud;
and because his Shechinah or glorious Majesty is revealed there, he is cautioned not to
use himself to go in, i.e. at any time; with which agrees the Targum of Jonathan,"for in
my cloud the glory of my Shechinah, or divine Majesty, shall be revealed upon the mercy
seat.''And this being the case, such a glory being there, though wrapped up in a cloud
and thick darkness, it was dangerous to enter but by divine order.
HENRY, " The design of this law. One intention of it was to preserve a veneration for
the most holy place, within the veil, where the shechinah, or divine glory, was pleased to
dwell between the cherubim: Speak unto Aaron, that he come not at all times into the
holy place, Lev_16:2. Before the veil some of the priests came every day to burn incense
upon the golden altar, but within the veil none must ever come but the high priest only,
and he but on one day in the year, and with great ceremony and caution. That place
where God manifested his special presence must not be made common. If none must
come into the presence-chamber of an earthly king uncalled, no, not the queen herself,
upon pain of death (Est_4:11), was it not requisite that the same sacred respect should
15

16. be paid to the Kings of kings? But see what a blessed change is made by the gospel of
Christ; all good Christians have now boldness to enter into the holiest, through the veil,
every day (Heb_10:19, Heb_10:20); and we come boldly (not as Aaron must, with fear
and trembling) to the throne of grace, or mercy-seat, Heb_4:16. While the
manifestations of God's presence and grace were sensible, it was requisite that they
should thus be confined and upon reserve, because the objects of sense the more familiar
they are made the less awful or delightful they become; but now that they are purely
spiritual it is otherwise, for the objects of faith the more they are conversed with the
more do they manifest of their greatness and goodness: now therefore we are welcome to
come at all times into the holy place not made with hands, for we are made to sit
together with Christ in heavenly places by faith, Eph_2:6. Then Aaron must not come
near at all times, lest he die; we now must come near at all times that we may live: it is
distance only that is our death. Then God appeared in the cloud upon the mercy-seat,
but now with open face we behold, not in a dark cloud, but in a clear glass, the glory of
the Lord, 2Co_3:18.
JAMISON, "Speak unto Aaron thy brother, that he come not at all times
into the holy place within the veil, etc. — Common priests went every day into the
part of the sanctuary without the veil to burn incense on the golden altar. But none
except the high priest was allowed to enter within the veil, and that only once a year with
the greatest care and solemnity. This arrangement was evidently designed to inspire a
reverence for the most holy place, and the precaution was necessary at a time when the
presence of God was indicated by sensible symbols, the impression of which might have
been diminished or lost by daily and familiar observation.
I will appear in the cloud — that is, the smoke of the incense which the high priest
burnt on his yearly entrance into the most holy place: and this was the cloud which at
that time covered the mercy seat.
CALVIN, "2.Speak unto Aaron. The sum of the law is, that the priest should not
frequently enter the inner sanctuary, but only once a year, i.e., on the feast of the
atonement, in the month of September. The cause of this was, lest a more frequent
entrance of it should produce indifference; for if he had entered it promiscuously at
every sacrifice, no small part of the reverence due to it would have been lost. The
ordinary sprinkling of the altar was sufficient to testify the reconciliation; but this
annual ceremony more greatly influenced the people’s minds. Again, by this
sacrifice, which they saw only once at the end of the year, the one and perpetual
sacrifice offered by God’s Son was more clearly represented. Therefore the Apostle
elegantly alludes to this ceremony in the Epistle to the Hebrews, where it is said that
by the annual entrance of the high priest the Holy Ghost signified,
"that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first
tabernacle was yet standing,”
(Hebrews 9:8;)
and a little further on he adds, that after Christ the true Priest had come,
"he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.”
16

17. (Hebrews 9:11.)
Thus the year, in the ancient type, was a symbol of the one offering, so that believers
might understand that the sacrifice, whereby God was to be propitiated, was not to
be often repeated. That God may inspire greater fear, and preserve the priests from
carelessness, He proclaims that His glory should appear in the cloud in that part of
the sanctuary where was the mercy seat; for we know that the sign was given from
hence to the Israelites, when the camp was to be moved, or when they were to
remain stationary. But this testimony of God’s presence should have justly moved
the priests to greater care and attention; and hence we may now learn, that the
closer God’s majesty manifests itself, the more anxiously should we beware, lest
through our thoughtlessness we should give any mark of contempt, but that we
should testify our submission with becoming humility and modesty.
COKE, "Verse 2
Leviticus 16:2. Speak unto Aaron thy brother, that he come not— We have in this
chapter an account of one of the most solemn and important ceremonies of the law;
to the spiritual intent of which, we are immediately directed by the writer of the
epistle to the Hebrews. Spencer observes, that God wisely made the ritual
institutions of the Jews to answer a double end, both to keep up a certain regard to
the [Mosaic] modes and forms of worship; and, at the same time, to exhibit a figure
or shadow of a new and better dispensation, which was to take place under the
Messiah. Thus the whole ceremony practised at the solemn feast of expiation,
appears to have been typical, and intended to prefigure the great atonement made
by Jesus Christ, the High-Priest of our profession. Accordingly, the writer to the
Hebrews observes, that the high-priest entering once a year into the holy of holies
with the blood of the sacrifice, figured Christ's entering into heaven by his own
blood, to obtain eternal redemption for us. (Hebrews 9:11; Hebrews 9:28.) And
because Christ's death and resurrection could not both be fitly shadowed out by one
animal, which the priest, having once killed, could not again make alive; therefore
God appointed two; that in the slain animal Christ's death, and in the living one his
life and victory, might be foreshewed; see ch. Leviticus 14:5. With this key, the
reader will better understand the whole of this chapter. The high-priest, according
to his office, went every day, morning and evening, into the holy place: but here it is
enjoined, that he enter not into the holy place within the vail, which is commonly
called the most holy place, except only upon one day in the year, that of expiation
for the sins of the whole people, Hebrews 9:7. It is true, upon extraordinary
occasions the high-priest was allowed to go within the vail; as for the purpose of
consulting the oracle, &c. but otherwise he was allowed in ordinary to enter but
once a year; a prohibition, which, some have imagined, arose from Aaron's sons
breaking into the most holy place, there to offer incense; and which presumption,
according to these commentators, occasioned their death. But the reason is
subjoined why Aaron should not presume to come within the vail without due
preparation: though that reason does not strike us through our translation; for I
will appear in the cloud upon the mercy-seat: it should be rendered, when I shall
17

18. appear in the cloud upon the mercy-seat; ne moriatur tum cum ego in nube
apparebo super propitiatorium, says Houbigant; i.e. "lest if he shall enter the most
holy without due preparation, and more than once in a year, he may perish through
that very cloud, in which I am about to appear. Approaching my presence
improperly and unbidden, may procure him death; for to such that Presence is
death;" see Exodus 19:21; Exodus 19:25. Some think that the cloud here mentioned,
means the cloud of incense arising from the censer brought into the holy of holies by
the high-priest. We may just remark, that several of the heathen nations had sacred
places, or adyta, which were entered but once a year, no doubt, after this example;
see Outram de Sacrif. lib. 1: cap. 3.
ELLICOTT, " (2) That he come not at all times.—Moses is therefore to warn his
brother Aaron, the high priest, that if he wishes to escape a similar fate, he is not to
presume to enter the Holy of Holies except on one day of the year, the Day of
Atonement. As Aaron here stands for all those who in future are to succeed him in
the pontificate, so Moses, who teaches him his duty, stands for his successors who
are hereafter to impart instruction to the high priests on these most solemn
occasions. Hence during the second Temple the tuition and preparation of the high
priest for his functions devolved upon the Sanhedrin, who prescribed most minute
rules for his guidance. Seven days before the Day of Atonement he was separated
from his wife, and lodged in a chamber in the Temple, lest he should contract
defilement, which might unfit him for the performance of his pontifical duties. The
elders or the representatives of the Sanhedrin read and expounded to him the
ordinances contained in this chapter; which he had to practise in their [presence, so
as to make sure that he could rightly perform all the ceremonies. This continued
during the whole night previous to the Day of Atonement, when he was kept awake,
so as to prevent any pollution arising from a dream or accident by night.
He read, in the silent hours of darkness, the Books of Job, Daniel, Ezra, and
Chronicles; and if he was no scholar, and could not read, the elders read them to
him. As it was deemed important that he should not fall asleep, the priests who
surrounded him alternately snapped their fingers, and made him walk on the cold
pavement of the court. When the chief of the thirteen priests who were appointed to
perform the ordinary duties in connection with the service in the sanctuary had
ascertained that the morning had dawned, that the ashes had been removed from
the brazen altar, and that the time of the early sacrifice had arrived, the high priest
was conducted to the baptistery, where he immersed his whole body in water.
Into the holy place.—This is here more minutely defined by “within the vail,” thus
showing that the Holy of Holies is meant. In the succeeding portions of this chapter,
however, the expression “holy” is used for “Holy of Holies” without this adjunct.
(See Leviticus 16:3; Leviticus 16:16-17; Leviticus 16:20; Leviticus 16:27.)
Before the mercy seat, which is upon the ark.—Or, according to the accents of the
received text, nor come to the mercy seat, which, &c. The present text exhibits the
view of the Pharisees—that the high priest, though at some distance from the ark, is
18

19. yet hid through the frankincense on the burning coals in the Holy of Holies itself
(see Leviticus 16:12-13); whilst the Sadducees maintained that he must put it on the
coals already in the court, because they deemed it improper to work in the presence
of the Lord, and because the pontiff would otherwise see the ark. The Authorised
Version, therefore, here, as elsewhere, follows the view of the Sadducees, and
departs from the received accents, which are an essential part of the traditional text.
For I will appear in the cloud.—That is, because the Lord appeared over the mercy
seat and between the cherubim in the bright luminous cloud which constituted the
symbol of His Divine presence (see Exodus 25:22), therefore even the high priest
must not approach it except on the occasion here prescribed. The Sadducees,
however, render it, only in the cloud of incense will I be seen on the cover, that is, in
the cloud arising from the burning incense which the high priest is to produce by
fumigation before he enters the Holy of Holies, and which is to conceal the
manifested Deity.
PETT, "Verse 2
‘And Yahweh said to Moses, “Speak to Aaron your brother, that he come not at all
times into the holy place within the veil, before the mercy-seat which is on the ark,
that he die not. For I will appear in the cloud on the mercy-seat.” ’
God’s first warning is that Aaron recognise that the High Priest does not have the
right to enter the Holy of Holies, ‘the holy place within the veil’, except by strict
permission, that permission being given only on the Day of Atonement. He does not
have unrestricted access. For while God appears in the cloud on the mercy-seat,
man may approach Him, apart from on the Day of Atonement, only from the other
side of the veil. He cannot enter the throne room. To approach the mercy-seat direct
could only be a once in the year experience. ‘The Holy Spirit signifying this, that the
way into the Holy of Holies was not yet opened up, while the first tabernacle was
still standing’ (Hebrews 9:8). The veil said, thus far shall you come and no further.
The cloud was presumably the cloud that had accompanied Israel from Egypt, the
cloud of His presence which by night became a fire (Exodus 13:21-22 and often).
We are reminded here of how when God revealed His glory on the face of Moses the
people were afraid to come near him, and he had to veil his face. None but Moses
could cope with the glory of God, until One came whose face also shone like the sun
revealing His Father’s glory (Matthew 17:2; John 1:14; John 1:18). Thus the need
for the veil and the cloud.
The ‘propitiatory’ or mercy-seat was the covering on the Ark of the Covenant of
Yahweh, where atonement could be made and man become reconciled to God. It
was the ‘kapporeth’, literally the place of propitiation, the place where
reconciliation and atonement was finally performed. This was a solid gold slab on
which were the two cherubim at either end looking inward. It was the same size as
19

20. the chest which it covered. It comes from the root ‘kpr’ (to cover) and the
conjugation used signifies the place where sins are ‘fully covered’ so that they are no
longer seen by God and held against the sinner (Jeremiah 18:23). It is the place of
propitiation and expiation, the place where the punishment for sin was met by the
shedding of blood, the place of atonement, of reconciliation, where He and His
people were made at one. There is also a suggestion behind it that it is the earthly
throne of Yahweh between the cherubim.
The writer to the Hebrews in the New Testament very much has this Day in mind in
Hebrews 9-10, seeing its real fulfilment in the offering up of Jesus Christ on our
behalf by Himself as our great High Priest. That once-for-all offering of Himself
would replace for ever this Day of Atonement, and all the other offerings, sacrifices
and rituals of this earthly tabernacle.
BENSON. "Leviticus 16:2. That he come not at all times — Not whensoever he
pleaseth, but only when I shall appoint. Into the holy place without the veil, the
high- priest, or one of the inferior priests, went every morning and evening when
they offered incense but into this holy place within the veil, commonly called the
holy of holies, or the most holy place, as none but the high-priest was to enter, so
neither was he to enter it at all times, as a common place of worship, or to perform
divine service there at his pleasure. He was ordinarily to enter it only once a year,
and that on the great day of atonement, or expiation for the transgressions of the
whole Israelitish nation. Upon extraordinary occasions, he might also enter it
oftener, as when he was to consult the oracle of God, or when the tabernacle was to
be taken down or set up, according to the journeyings of the people. Lest he die —
For his presumption. For I will appear in the cloud — A bright and glorious cloud
over the mercy-seat. This sacred apartment he was to look upon as the place of the
special residence of the divine glory, and therefore was not to enter there but when
appointed, and in such a manner as God directed.
WHEDON, " 2. Come not at all times — Many of the ancient pagan shrines were
inaccessible, and hence they were called adytum and abaton, “not to be
approached.” This seclusion of the idol within the penetralia of the temple was
requisite in order to preserve the veneration of the people, through the operation of
that law of the human mind by which the mysterious is clothed by the imagination
with extraordinary qualities. But no such reason is the ground of this prohibition.
Jehovah’s majesty needs no imaginary splendours. The old covenant says, “Obey
and live, disobey and die;” the new one says, “Believe and be saved, believe not and
be damned.” Both covenants are essentially the same, inasmuch as faith is the root
of obedience, and unbelief and disobedience are in the New Testament expressed by
the same word — απειθεια.
In the cloud — Not the cloud of incense required to soften the insufferable
splendours of the shekinah, but the shekinah itself. Hence the Targum of Jonathan,
“The glory of my shekinah shall be revealed.” A resplendence beamed forth from
between the cherubim; but to make the vision supportable to mortal eyes God hid
20

21. himself while revealing himself. The cloud is the same as that mentioned in Exodus
xl, which appeared over the mercy seat whenever the high priest came before it. The
rabbins postulate a cloud continually hanging over the cherubim. Luther, on the
contrary, says that “over the propitiatory and cherubim there was nothing located
which might be seen, but by faith only was God believed to be seated there.” In the
Scriptures the manifested glory of the Son of Man, the Jehovah of the Old
Testament, is often associated with a cloud. Daniel 7:13; Revelation 1:7.
The mercy seat — We are required by the truth to say that this expression, so
poetical and so consolatory to the God-fearing soul, is not a literal translation of the
original Hebrew, capporeth, the cover of the ark, in which were enshrined the tables
of the law. This cover was underneath the luminous cloud, and hence was the
footstool or throne of Jehovah, as the sanctuary in which it was placed is called “the
place for thee to dwell in.” Exodus 15:17. The capporeth was a massive gold plate
equal to the ark in length and breadth, at either end of which was a solid golden
cherub. We find no scripture to sustain Ewald’s assertion that the ark had a cover
distinct from this plate, yet it is usually mentioned separately. Exodus 25:17. The
word capporeth may be derived from the Piel form of the verb caphar, to cover, in
which form it signifies to make atonement; it is very doubtful whether the noun ever
signifies an instrument of propitiation (propitiatorium, Vulgate, ιλαστηριον, the
Seventy) in the Pentateuch. Yet it is more probable that in later Hebrew, as in 1
Chronicles 28:11, it acquired the additional meaning of an atonement for sin. This
relieves the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews of the imputation made by Furst,
that he adopted a gloss in Hebrews 9:5. In Hebrews 4:16 the capporeth is very
beautifully styled “the throne of grace,” to which we may come, not with trembling
and overwhelming awe, as did the high priest, but “boldly.”
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:2 And the LORD said unto Moses, Speak unto Aaron thy
brother, that he come not at all times into the holy [place] within the vail before the
mercy seat, which [is] upon the ark; that he die not: for I will appear in the cloud
upon the mercy seat.
Ver. 2. that he come not at all times.] Whensoever he pleaseth, but when I appoint
him, i.e., once a year only, [Exodus 30:10] and then also with reverence and godly
fear. God, as he loves to be acquainted with men in the walks of their obedience, so
he takes state upon him in his ordinances, and will be trembled at in his judgments.
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:2
Speak unto Aaron thy brother, that he come not at all times into the holy place
within the vail before the mercy seat, which is upon the ark; that he die not. Nadab
and Abihu having died for their rash presumption in venturing unbidden into the
tabernacle, it was natural that Aaron, who had as yet but once penetrated into the
holy of holies, should be struck with fear, and that he should desire Divine
instruction as to the times and manner in which he was to appear before the Lord,
lest he should be struck dead like his sons. If the attempt to enter the outer chamber
21

22. of the tabernacle had been so fatal to them, what might not be the result to him of
entering within the vail which hung before the mercy-seat which is upon the ark?
The mercy-seat—capporeth, ἱλαστήριον, propitiatorium—formed the top of the ark,
and was the place where God specially exhibited his Presence, on the occasions of
his manifestation, by the bright cloud which then rested upon it between the
cherubim. It was this Presence which made it perilous for Aaron to appear within
the vail unbidden or without the becoming ritual; for man might not meet God
unless he were sanctified for the purpose (Exodus 19:14, Exodus 19:21-24; 1 Samuel
6:19). The words, for I will appear in the cloud upon the mercy seat, refer to the
Divine Presence thus visibly manifested (see 1 Kings 8:10-12), and not, as they have
strangely been misinterpreted, to the cloud of smoke raised by the incense burnt by
the high priest on his entrance. They do not, however, prove that the manifestation
was constantly there, still less that it was continued, according to Jewish tradition,
in later times. "The reason for the prohibition of Aaron's entrance at his own
pleasure, or without the expiatory blood of sacrifice, is to be found in the fact that
the holiness communicated to the priest did not cancel the sin of his nature, but only
covered it over for the performance of his official duties; and so long as the Law,
which produced only the knowledge of sin, and not its forgiveness and removal, was
not abolished by the complete atonement, the holy God was and remained to mortal
and sinful man a consuming fire, before which no one could stand" (Keil).
BI 2-3, "I will appear in the cloud.
Jehovah appearing in a cloud
I. The cloudy dispensations. By a cloud I understand a density approaching to darkness
and gloom; and yet that very density and darkness inhabited by the glory of God. If the
glory of God were to burst upon us without a cloud, it would be nothing less than a
consuming fire. The Church of God has to pass through dispensations that are cloudy in
her public capacity, in God’s providential dealings with her individual members. Look,
for instance, at the Church of God as a body at the present time. Is she not beclouded?
Are there not clouds of ignorance, superstition, idolatry, despotic power—clouds of
carnal wickedness under the name of Christianity, overspreading Zion? The cloud is still
more dense when it overwhelms the soul, as it regards its conflicts when darkness
overspreads the mind, and the poor believer cannot pray, cannot sing, nor cannot
believe.
II. The appearance that is promised. “I will appear in the cloud upon the mercy-seat.”
He appears as a wonder-working God; and when in any of the dispensations to which I
have referred, the hand of God is seen, how are the souls of God’s people filled with awe!
“I will appear.” Is it the Church that is overwhelmed with a cloud? I will appear for her
deliverance, though I may suffer her to pass through fire and through water first. Is it
Providence that is mysterious—every hope cut off, all prospects darkened? “I will
appear,” says Jehovah. Mark the promise—it is positive—“I will appear.” The cattle upon
a thousand hills are His property; the gold and the silver He declares are all His own; the
hearts of kings are in His hands, and He turns them as rivers of water as He pleases. So
that He appears working wonders frequently in the world, and those very things which
were most threatening appear to be the very things that God was making use of for the
real advantage of His people.
22

23. III. The mercy displayed. It is the mercy of the Triune Jehovah, the gift of mercy from
God the Father—immutable, eternal, covenant mercy—the mercy of God. That mercy is
fully and freely displayed in the person of Christ; yea, more, so far as regards our view of
it—the mercy of God the Father laid up from everlasting, recorded in the covenant, fixed
in decree, is, to a certain extent, concealed from us, until we discover it in the person of
Christ. But when we are brought to view Him as the mercy promised, and then mark the
display of that mercy in His incarnation, in His obedience, in His merit, in His blood, in
His sufferings, in His victories, in His present employment before the throne, why He is
all mercy—mercy embodied in the person of the glorious Mediator. And then, if we look
at the merciful dealings of God the Holy Ghost with His people, in melting their hearts,
making them new creatures, giving them life Divine, perfecting the work He has first
commenced in personal experience—why we come to this conclusion that our God,
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is the God of mercy, a merciful God. Then mark the
transcendent glory of this mercy, how it is displayed in the face of misery, and rebellion,
and ingratitude, and all our wanderings, and all our wants.
IV. The effects which follow when Jehovah comes down and appears in the midst of the
cloud. It is not merely for a momentary interposition, but for a permanent deliverance,
and mercies may be expected by all the praying seed of Jacob. Now allow a familiar
illustration here. If a benevolent individual, very wealthy, were accustomed to take a
seat, as they used to do in olden times, at the gate of the city, or in any other place of
public concourse, and to do so for the very purpose of distributing his bounty, would not
that gate be crowded? Who would not go there? Even if we did not want pecuniary alms,
if honours, jewels were to be distributed by this person, who would not be there? Who
would not receive some token of the kindness and favour of such an one? My hearer, is it
not grievous that you and I are not oftener at the mercy-seat? (J. Irons.)
The concealing cloud
I once visited an invalid woman. She had been confined to bed for a long time, and when
I spoke to her, she said: “I think the Lord has forgotten me altogether.” The eye of faith
had grown dim through bodily weakness, and I replied to her, “Did you ever go down the
river and see the lighthouse?” She said she had. “Well, suppose you lived on the opposite
side from it, and one day the mist came down, and it grew so thick that you could not see
the lighthouse on the other side; would you believe it was there?” “Oh, yes,” she said,
“because I had seen it before.” “And there is another thing would make you believe, I
said; “you would hear the shrill whistle coming from the lighthouse warning mariners of
the danger that was near. In the same way you should believe that the Lord is still near
you; that He has not forgotten you, although a cloud has come between you and God; if
you will but listen, you will hear His voice speaking to you; the mist will soon roll away if
you look right at Him with the eye of faith.” She did look, and beheld Jesus as precious
to her as ever. (J. Cameron.)
3 “This is how Aaron is to enter the Most Holy
23

24. Place: He must first bring a young bull for a sin
offering[a] and a ram for a burnt offering.
BARNES, "Holy place - This name here denotes the sanctuary, the whole sacred
enclosure, the court of the tabernacle. The offerings were for Aaron and his sons,
supplied by himself.
CLARKE, "With a young bullock for a sin-offering - The bullock was
presented as a sin-offering for himself, his family, the whole priesthood, and probably
the Levites. The ram was for a burnt-offering, to signify that he and his associates were
wholly consecrated, and to be wholly employed in this work of the ministry. The
ceremonies with which these two sacrifices were accompanied are detailed in the
following verses.
GILL, "Thus shall Aaron come into the holy place,.... The most holy place; and
this was after he had offered the daily sacrifice of the morning, and had performed the
rest of the service then done, as Gersom observes; such as burning the incense and
trimming the lamps, for no offering preceded the daily sacrifice:
with a young bullock for a sin offering, and a ram for a burnt offering; which
were both for himself and his family; and such were the weakness, imperfection, and
insufficiency of the Levitical priesthood, and priests, that they were obliged first to offer
for their own sins, and then for the sins of the people: the meaning is not, as Aben Ezra
says, that he should bring the bullock into the holy place, only that he should first give of
his own a bullock for a sin offering, to atone for himself, and for the priests; nor could it
be the body of the bullock he brought, only the blood of it into the most holy place,
where he entered not without blood, first with the blood of the bullock, and then with
the blood of the goat; for the body of the bullock for a sin offering was burnt without the
camp, and the body of the ram for the burnt offering was burnt upon the altar of burnt
offering; see Heb_9:7.
HENRY, "The person to whom the work of this day was committed, and that was the
high priest only: Thus shall Aaron come into the holy place, Lev_16:3. He was to do all
himself upon the day of atonement: only there was a second provided to be his substitute
or supporter, in case any thing should befal him, either of sickness or ceremonial
uncleanness, that he could not perform the service of the day. All Christians are spiritual
priests, but Christ only is the high priest, and he alone it is that makes atonement, nor
needed he either assistant or substitute.
JAMISON 3-4, "Thus shall Aaron come into the holy place — As the duties of
the great day of atonement led to the nearest and most solemn approach to God, the
24

25. directions as to the proper course to be followed were minute and special.
with a young bullock ... and a ram — These victims he brought alive, but they
were not offered in sacrifice till he had gone through the ceremonies described between
Lev_16:3-11. He was not to attire himself on that occasion in the splendid robes that
were proper to his sacred office, but in a plain dress of linen, like the common Levites,
for, as he was then to make atonement for his own sins, as well as for those of the people,
he was to appear in the humble character of a suppliant. That plain dress was more in
harmony with a season of humiliation (as well as lighter and more convenient for the
duties which on that occasion he had singly to perform) than the gorgeous robes of the
pontificate. It showed that when all appeared as sinners, the highest and lowest were
then on a level, and that there is no distinction of persons with God [Act_10:34].
K&D 3-5, "Only ‫ֹאת‬‫ז‬ ְ‫,בּ‬ “with this,” i.e., with the sacrifices, dress, purifications, and
means of expiation mentioned afterwards, could he go into “the holy place,” i.e.,
according to the more precise description in Lev_16:2, into the inmost division of the
tabernacle, which is called Kodesh hakkadashim, “the holy of holies,” in Exo_26:33. He
was to bring an ox (bullock) for a sin-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering, as a
sacrifice for himself and his house (i.e., the priesthood, Lev_16:6), and two he-goats for
a sin-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering, as a sacrifice for the congregation. For this
purpose he was to put on, not the state-costume of the high priest, but a body-coat,
drawers, girdle, and head-dress of white cloth (bad: see Exo_28:42), having first bathed
his body, and not merely his hands and feet, as he did for the ordinary service, to appear
before Jehovah as entirely cleansed from the defilement of sin (see at Lev_8:6) and
arrayed in clothes of holiness. The dress of white cloth was not the plain official dress of
the ordinary priests, for the girdle of that dress was coloured (see at Exo_28:39-40); and
in that case the high priest would not have appeared in the perfect purity of his divinely
appointed office as chief of the priesthood, but simply as the priest appointed for this
day (v. Hoffmann). Nor did he officiate (as many of the Rabbins, and also C. a Lapide,
Grotius, Rosenmüller, and Knobel suppose) as a penitent praying humbly for the
forgiveness of sin. For where in all the world have clear white clothes been worn either in
mourning or as a penitential garment? The emphatic expression, “these are holy
garments,” is a sufficient proof that the pure white colour of all the clothes, even of the
girdle, was intended as a representation of holiness. Although in Exo_28:2, Exo_28:4,
etc., the official dress not only of Aaron, but of his sons also, that is to say, the priestly
costume generally, is described as “holy garments,” yet in the present chapter the word
kodesh, “holy,” is frequently used in an emphatic sense (for example, in Lev_16:2, Lev_
16:3, Lev_16:16, of the most holy place of the dwelling), and by this predicate the dress is
characterized as most holy. Moreover, it was in baddim (“linen”) that the angel of
Jehovah was clothed (Eze_9:2-3, Eze_9:11; Eze_10:2, Eze_10:6-7, and Dan_10:5; Dan_
12:6-7), whose whole appearance, as described in Dan_10:6, resembled the appearance
of the glory of Jehovah, which Ezekiel saw in the vision of the four cherubim (ch. 1), and
was almost exactly like the glory of Jesus Christ, which John saw in the Revelation
(Rev_1:13-15). The white material, therefore, of the dress which Aaron wore, when
performing the highest act of expiation under the Old Testament, was a symbolical
shadowing forth of the holiness and glory of the one perfect Mediator between God and
man, who, being the radiation of the glory of God and the image of His nature, effected
25

26. by Himself the perfect cleansing away of our sin, and who, as the true High Priest, being
holy, innocent, unspotted, and separate from sinners, entered once by His own blood
into the holy place not made with hands, namely, into heaven itself, to appear before the
face of God for us, and obtain everlasting redemption (Heb_1:3; Heb_7:26; Heb_9:12,
Heb_9:24).
CALVIN, "3.Thus shall Aaron come into the holy place. The rites and formality are
now described; first, that Aaron should put on the holy garments, and wash his
person; secondly, that he should offer a bullock and ram for a burnt-offering;
thirdly, that he should take two goats from the people, one of which should be sent
away alive, and the other slain in sacrifice. We have stated elsewhere why the priests
were to be dressed in garments different from others, since he who is the mediator
between God and men should be free from all impurity and stain; and since no
mortal could truly supply this, a type was substituted in place of the reality, from
whence believers might learn that another Mediator was to be expected; because the
dignity of the sons of Aaron was only typical, and not true and substantial. For
whenever the priest stripped himself of his own garments, and assumed those which
were holy and separated from common use, it was equivalent to declaring openly
that he represented another person. But if this symbol were not sufficient, the
ablution again taught that none of the sons of Aaron was the genuine propitiator;
for how could he purify others, who himself required purification, and made open
confession of his uncleanness? A third symbol also was added; for he who by a
sacrifice of his own atoned for himself and his house, how was he capable of
meriting God’s favor for others? Thus then the holy fathers were reminded, that
under the image of a mortal man, another Mediator was promised, who, for the
reconciliation of the human race, should present Himself before God with perfect
and more than angelical purity. Besides, in the person of the priest there was
exhibited to the people a spectacle of the corruption whereby the whole human race
is defiled, so as to be abominable to God; for if the priest, both chosen by God, and
graced with the sacred unction, was still unworthy on the score of his uncleanness to
come near the altar, what dignity could be discoverable in the people? And hence to
us now-a-days also very useful instruction is derived; viz., that when the question
arises how God is to be propitiated, we are not to look this way and that way; since
out of Christ there is no purity and innocence which can satisfy the justice of God.
COKE, "Leviticus 16:3. Thus shall Aaron come,—with a young bullock, &c.— Two
solemn sacrifices were to be offered by the high-priest for himself and his family,
(Leviticus 16:6.—in which family, some have thought, are included not only the
priests, but the Levites also) preparatory to his entrance into the holy of holies: a
sin-offering, in confession of his own weakness, and need of a better intercessor; see
ch. Leviticus 4:3. Hebrews 7:27 and a burnt-offering, in token of his entire
dedication of himself to God.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 3
26

27. (3) Thus shall Aaron come.—Better, With this shall, &c, that is, with the following
sacrifices, ritual, vestments, &c, shall he approach the most holy place, after having
offered previously the daily morning sacrifice, and performed the ordinary daily
service. During the performance of the morning service the high priest, at the time
of Christ, wore the golden vestments. These he changed for the white garments
before he commenced the special ritual prescribed for this day.
With a young bullock for a sin offering.—Which had to be of the second year (see
Exodus 29:1), and which the high priest had to buy with his own money. It was to be
his own property because the victim was to expiate his own sins, since he, like the
meanest sinner, required Divine mercy and forgiveness, though, owing to his high
office, he had to bring a more costly sacrifice.
PETT, "Verse 3
“With this shall Aaron come into the holy place, with a young bull ox for a
purification for sin offering, and a ram for a whole burnt offering.”
On this day, after the morning whole burnt offering (a lamb of the first year) had
been offered with its accompanying grain offering, Aaron’s approach to Yahweh
had to commence with offerings for himself and the priests. These would consist of a
young bull ox for a purification for sin offering and a ram for a whole burnt
offering. He must make sacrifices first for himself (Hebrews 5:3; Hebrews 9:7). He
too was a sinner in need of atonement.
How much different was this from our great High Priest, the Lord Jesus Christ,
Who was without sin, Whose perfections and Whose perfect life and Whose total
obedience fitted Him for His office with no need of sacrifice (Hebrews 7:26-27).
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:3. Thus shall Aaron come — Preparatory to his entering on
this solemn service the high-priest was to offer two sacrifices in behalf of himself
and his family. These were, 1st, A bullock for a sin-offering, (no other sacrifice
being allowed for the sin of a high-priest,) in confession of his own infirmities and
transgressions, and those of his family, and to put him in mind that he needed
pardon himself, and was but an imperfect intercessor with God, Hebrews 7:27;
Hebrews 9:7. 2d, A ram for a burnt- offering, in token of his dedicating himself
wholly to God, with a promise of new obedience. See note on Leviticus 1:3. Aaron
shall come into the holy place with the bullock — That is, with the blood of it; for its
body was to be offered upon the altar of burnt-offerings.
WHEDON, " AN OUTLINE OF THE WHOLE CEREMONIAL, Leviticus 16:3-10.
3. Holy place — This is here used, not for the court of the priests, but for the holy of
holies.
Bullock — The high office of Aaron requires the greatest of the sin offerings. See
27

28. chap. 4, concluding notes. (4.) Note the presumption, that this high official had so
failed to keep the holy law of God that he annually needed an offering not only for
his conscious and wilful sins, but also for his inadvertencies, ignorances, and errors.
Hebrews 5:2. See concluding notes to chap. 4.
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:3
Thus shall Aaron come into the holy place. "Thus" would be translated more
literally by With this. He must come supplied with the specified offerings, dressed in
the appointed manner and using the ceremonial here designated. The efficacy of the
acts of the high priest on this day and throughout his ministrations depended not
upon his individual but on his official character, and on his obedience to the various
commandments positively enjoined. Personal worthiness would not qualify him for
his service, nor personal unworthiness hinder the effect of his liturgical acts (cf. Art.
26, 'Of the Unworthiness of the Ministers, which hinders not the effect of the
Sacrament'). Aaron's special offerings for himself on this great day are to be a
young bullock for a sin offering, and a ram for a burnt offering.
BI 3-34, "Make an atonement.
The annual atonement
Before Adam transgressed he lived in communion with God, but after he had broken the
covenant he could have no more familiar fellowship with God. Under the Mosaic
dispensation, in which God was pleased in His grace to dwell among His people and
walk with them in the wilderness, it was still under a reserve: there was a Holy Place
wherein the symbol of God’s presence was hidden away from mortal gaze. No man might
come near to it except in one only way, and then only once in the year, “The Holy Ghost
thus signifying that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the
first Tabernacle was yet standing.” Our subject illustrates the appointed way of access to
God. This chapter shows that the way of access to God is by atonement, and by no other
method. I want you to notice that, of course, this was only a type. The great Day of
Atonement did not see an actual atonement made, nor sin really put away; but it was the
figure of heavenly things to come. The substance is of Christ.
I. Now, then, let us come to the text, and note, first, what was done on that particular
day. The text tells us what was done symbolically—“On that day shall the priest make an
atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins before the
Lord.”
1. The persons themselves were cleansed. If any of them had become unclean so as to
be denied communion with God and His people, they were made clean, so that they
might go up to the Tabernacle, and mingle with the congregation. All the host were
that morning regarded as unclean, and all had to bow their heads in penitent sorrow
because of their uncleanness. After the sacrifice and the sending away of the
scapegoat the whole congregation was clean and in a condition to rejoice. It is a far
simpler thing to remove outward stains than it is to purge the very substance and
nature of man; yet this is what was done on the Day of Atonement typically, and this
is what our redeeming Lord actually does for us. We are outlaws, and His atonement
28

29. purges us of outlawry, and makes us citizens; we are lepers, and by His stripes we are
so healed as to be received among the clean.
2. Their persons being made clean, they were also purged of all the sins confessed.
Sin that is confessed is evidently real sin, and not a mere dream of a morbid
conscience. There is a certain mythical cloud of sin which people talk about, and
affect to deplore, and yet they have no sense of the solid heinousness of their actual
iniquity. Sin confessed with tears, sin which causes the very heart to bleed—killing
sin—this is the kind of sin for which Jesus died. Sin which you dare not confess to
man, but acknowledge only as you lay your hand upon the Divine sacrifice—such sin
the Lord removes from you. The passage is very particular to mention “all sins.” “The
goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities.” This includes every form of stir, of
thought, of word, of deed, of pride, of falsehood, of lust, of malice, of blasphemy.
This comprehends crimes against man, and offences against God, of peculiar
blackness; and it does not exclude sins of inadvertence, or carelessness, or of
omission. Transgressions of the body, the intellect, the affections are all blotted out.
3. It seems that the Divine atonement puts away the sin of sin—the essence and
heart of sin. Sin has its core, its mortal spot, within each iniquity there seems to lie a
something more essentially evil than the act itself: this is the inner hate of the mind.
Whatever may be the sin of the soul, or the soul of the sin, atonement has been made
for it all. The Lord Jesus has not left upon those for whom He has made atonement a
single spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, so far as their justification is concerned.
He has not left an iniquity for which they can be condemned before the bar of
judgment. “Ye are clean every whit” is His sure verdict, and none can contradict it
4. Not only were all the sins that they had committed put away, but also all their holy
things were purged. I do feel so glad that our Lord has atoned for the sins of our holy
things. I feel so glad that Jesus has purified our prayers. Many saints spend much
time in hearty, earnest cries to God; but even on your knees you sin; and herein is
our comfort—that the precious blood has made atonement for the shortcomings of
our supplications. We need pardon for our psalms and cleansing for our hymns.
Jesus puts away not only our unholy things, but the sins of our holy things also.
5. Once more, on that day all the people were cleansed. This gives great comfort to
those of us who love the souls of the multitude. All who believe are justified from all
things.
II. Now we notice, in the second place, how it was done.
1. The atonement was made first of all by sacrifice. We know that the blood of bulls
and of goats could never take away sin; but very distinctly do these point to the
sufferings of our Redeemer. The woes He bore are the expiation for our guilt.
2. Notice, next, that the atonement was made not only by the blood of sacrifice, but
by the presentation of the blood within the veil. With the smoke of incense and a
bowl filled with blood Aaron passed into the most Holy Place. Let us never forget
that our Lord has gone into the heavenly places with better sacrifices than Aaron
could present. His merits are the sweet incense which burns before the throne of the
heavenly grace. His death supplies that blood of sprinkling which we find even in
heaven.
3. Furthermore, atonement was made effectual by its application to the thing or
person cleansed. The atonement was made for the Holy Place: it was sprinkled seven
29

30. times with blood. The same was done to the altar; the horns thereof were smeared
seven times. So to make the atonement effectual between you and God the blood of
Jesus must be sprinkled upon you by a lively faith.
4. Further, inasmuch as no one type was sufficient, the Lord set forth the method of
the removal of sin, as far as we are concerned, by the scapegoat. One of two goats was
chosen to live. It stood before the Lord, and Aaron confessed all the sins of Israel
upon its head. A fit man, selected for the purpose, led this goat away into a land not
inhabited. What became of it? Why do you ask the question? It is not to edification.
You may have seen the famous picture of the scapegoat, representing it as expiring in
misery in a desert place. That is all very pretty, and I do not wonder that imagination
should picture the poor devoted scapegoat as a sort of cursed thing, left to perish
amid accumulated horrors. But please observe that this is all mere groundless fancy.
The Scripture is entirely silent as to anything of the kind, and purposely so. All that
the type teaches is this: in symbol the scapegoat, has all the sin of the people laid
upon it, and when it is led away into the solitary wilderness, it has gone, and the sin
with it. We may not follow the scapegoat even in imagination. It is gone where it can
never be found, for there is nobody to find it: it is gone into a land not inhabited—
into “no man’s land,” in fact. Stop where the Scripture stops. Sin is carried away into
the silent land, the unknown wilderness. The sins of God’s people have gone beyond
recall. Where to? Do not ask anything about that. If they were sought for they could
not be found; they are so gone that they are blotted out. Into oblivion our sins have
gone, even as the scapegoat went out of track of mortal man. “Who shall lay anything
to the charge of God’s elect?”
5. Yet the ceremony was not quite finished; for now everybody who had had a hand
in it must needs be washed, so that everybody might be clean. Everybody becomes
purged; the whole camp is clean right through. No sin remains upon Him on whom
the Lord once laid the iniquities of us all. The great atonement is made, and
everything is cleansed, from beginning to end. Christ hath put it all away for ever by
the water and the blood which flowed from His riven side. All is purified, and the
Lord looks down on a clean camp; and soon He will have them rejoicing before Him,
each man in His tabernacle, feasting to the full.
III. In the third place, I ask your attention, for a brief interval, to this special point—who
did it? The answer is, Aaron did it all. Now fix your eye on the great Antitype of Aaron.
There was none with our Lord: He trod the winepress alone. He His own self bare our
sins in His own body on the tree. He alone went to where the thick darkness covered the
throne of God, and none stood by to comfort Him. “All the disciples forsook Him, and
fled.” Worship our Lord as working salvation by His own single arm. Let that truth abide
in your hearts—our High Priest alone has made reconciliation.
IV. Lastly, what were the people to do for whom this atonement was made? There were
two things they had to do that day, only I must add that one of them was doing nothing.
1. For the first thing, they had to afflict their souls that day. It was a day of
confession of sin. And should not confession be made with sorrowful repentance? To
acknowledge sin without grieving over it is to aggravate sin.
2. Not only was it a day of confession, but it was a day of sacrifice. No tender-hearted
Israelite could think of that bullock, and ram, and goat dying for him, without saying,
“That is what I deserve.” When we think of our dying Lord our emotions are
30

31. mingled: we feel a pleasing grief and a mournful joy as we stand at Calvary.
3. Once more, it was a day of perfect cleansing, and hence, by a strange logic, a day of
the affliction of the soul; for, oh 1 when sin is forgiven, when by Divine assurance we
know that God has blotted out our sins like a cloud, then it is we mourn over our
iniquities. Afflict your soul when you remember what you once were.
4. On the Day of Atonement they were to afflict their souls, and yet they were to rest.
Can these things come together—mourning and resting? I never am so truly happy as
when a sober sadness tinges my joy. Nothing is more really sweet than the bitterness
of repentance” Nothing is more healthful than self-abhorrence, mixed with the
grateful love which hides itself in the wounds of Jesus. The purified people were to
rest; they were to rest from all servile work. I will never do a hand’s turn to save
myself by my own merits, works, or feelings. I have done for ever with all
interference with my Lord’s sole work. They were assuredly to cease from all sinful
work. How can the pardoned man continue in sin? We have done with toiling for the
devil now. We will no more waste our lives in his service. We are slaves no longer: we
quit the hard bondage of Egypt and rest in the Lord. We have also done with selfish
work; we now seek first the kingdom of heaven, and look that all other things shall be
added unto us by the goodness of our Heavenly Father. Henceforth we find rest by
bearing the easy yoke of Christ. We joy to spend and be spent in His beloved service.
(C. H. Spurgeon.)
The Day of Atonement
I. First, the person who was to make the atonement. And at the outset we remark that
Aaron, the high priest, did it. Inferior priests slaughtered lambs; other priests at other
times did almost all the work of the sanctuary; but on this day nothing was done by any
one, as a part of the business of the great Day of Atonement, except by the high priest.
Old rabbinical traditions tell us that everything on that day was done by him, even the
lighting of the candles, and the fires, and the incense, and all the offices that were
required, and that, for a fortnight beforehand, he was obliged to go into the Tabernacle
to slaughter the bullocks and assist in the work of the priests and Levites, that he might
be prepared to do the work which was unusual to him. All the labour was left to him. So
Jesus Christ, the High Priest, and He only, works the atonement. There are other priests,
for “He hath made us priests and kings unto God.” Every Christian is a priest to offer
sacrifice of prayer and praise unto God, but none save the High Priest must offer
atonement.
1. Then it is interesting to notice, that the high priest on this day was a humbled
priest. As Mayer tells us, he wore garments, and glorious ones, on other days, but on
this day he wore four humble ones. Jesus Christ, then, when He made atonement,
was a humbled priest. He did not make atonement arrayed in all the glories of His
ancient throne in heaven. Upon His brow there was no diadem, save the crown of
thorns; around Him was cast no purple robe, save that which He wore for a time in
mockery; in His hand was no sceptre, save the reed which they thrust in cruel
contempt upon Him; He had no sandals of pure gold, neither was He dressed as
king; He had none of those splendours about Him which should make Him
distinguished among men. Oh! my soul, adore thy Jesus, who when He made
atonement, humbled Himself and wrapped around Him a garb of thine inferior clay.
31

32. 2. In the next place, the high priest who offered the atonement must be a spotless
high priest; and because there were none such to be found, Aaron being a sinner
himself as well as the people, you will remark that Aaron had to sanctify himself and
make an atonement for his own sin before he could go in to make an atonement for
the sins of the people. We have a spotless High Priest; we have one who needed no
washing, for He had no filth to wash away,
3. Again, the atonement was made by a solitary high priest—alone and unassisted.
No other man was to be present, so that the people might be quite certain that
everything was done by the high priest alone. God kept that holy circle of Calvary
select to Christ, and none of His disciples must go to die there with Him. O glorious
High Priest, thou hast done it all alone!
4. Again it was a laborious high priest who did the work on that day. It is astonishing
how, after comparative rest, he should be so accustomed to his work as to be able to
perform all that he had to do on that day. I have endeavoured to count up how many
creatures he had to kill, and I find that there were fifteen beasts which he
slaughtered at different times, besides the other offices, which were all left to him.
He was ordained priest in Jeshurun, for that day, toiled like a common Levite,
worked as laboriously as priest could do, and far more so than on any ordinary day.
Just so with our Lord Jesus Christ. Oh, what a labour the atonement was to Him! It
was a work that all the hands of the universe could not have accomplished; yet He
completed it alone.
II. The means whereby this atonement was made (see Lev_16:5; Lev_16:7-10). The first
goat I consider to be the great type of Jesus Christ the Atonement; such I do not
consider the scapegoat to be. The first is the type of the means whereby the atonement
was made, and we shall keep to that first.
1. Notice that this goat, of course, answered all the pre-requisites of every other thing
that was sacrificed; it must be a perfect, unblemished goat of the first year. Even so
was our Lord a perfect Man, in the prime and vigour of His manhood.
2. And further, this goat was an eminent type of Christ from the fact that it was taken
of the congregation of the children of Israel, as we are told at the fifth verse. The
public treasury furnished the goat. So Jesus Christ was, first of all, purchased by the
public treasury of the Jewish people before He died. Thirty pieces of silver they had
valued Him at—a goodly price; and as they had been accustomed to bring the goat so
they brought Him to be offered, not indeed with the intention that He should be
their sacrifice, but unwittingly. Indeed, Jesus Christ came out from the midst of the
people, and the people brought Him. Strange that it should be so! “He came unto His
own, and His own received Him not”; His own led Him forth to slaughter; His own
dragged Him before the mercy-seat.
3. Note, again, that though this goat, like the scapegoat, was brought by the people,
God’s decision was in it still. Mark, it is said, “Aaron shall east lots upon the two
goats; one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat.” I conceive this
mention of lots is to teach that although the Jews brought Jesus Christ of their own
will to die, yet, Christ had been appointed to die; and even the very man who sold
Him was appointed to it—so saith the Scripture. Christ’s death was fore-ordained,
and there was not only man’s hand in it, but God’s.
4. Next, behold the goat that destiny has marked out to make the atonement. Come
32

33. and see it die. The priest stabs it. Mark it in its agonies; behold it struggling for a
moment; observe the blood as it gushes forth. Ye have here your Saviour. See His
Father’s vengeful sword sheathed in His heart; behold His death agonies; hear His
sighs and groans upon the Cross; hark to His shriek, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani,” and
you have more now to think of than you could have if you only stood to see the death
of a goat for your atonement. As the blood of the goat made the atonement typically,
so thy Saviour dying for thee made the great atonement for thy sins, and thou mayest
go free.
5. But mark, this goat’s blood was not only shed for many for the remission of sins as
a type of Christ, but that blood was taken within the veil, and there it was sprinkled.
So with Jesus’ blood, “Sprinkled now with blood the throne.”
III. We now come to the effects.
1. One of the first effects of the death of this goat was the sanctification of the holy
things which had been made unholy. Is it not sweet to reflect that our holy things are
now really holy?
2. But observe, the second great tact was that their sins were taken away. This was
set forth by the scapegoat.
3. One more thought concerning the effects of this great Day of Atonement, and you
will observe that it runs throughout the whole of the chapter—entrance within the
veil. Only on one day in the year might the high priest enter within the veil, and then
it must be for the great purposes of the atonement. Now the atonement is finished,
and you may enter within the veil: “Having boldness, therefore, to enter into the
holiest, let us come with boldness unto the throne of the heavenly grace.” The veil of
the Temple is rent by the atonement of Christ, and access to the throne is now ours.
IV. Now we come to notice, in the fourth place, what is our proper behaviour when we
consider the day of atonement. You read at verse 29, “And this shall be a statute for ever
unto you: that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, ye shall afflict your
souls.” That is one thing that we ought to do when we remember the atonement. “Law
and terrors do but harden,” but methinks the thought that Jesus died is enough to make
us melt. Then, better still, we are to “do no work at all,” as ye find in the same verse
(29th). When we consider the atonement, we should rest, and “do no work at all.” Rest
from your own righteousness; rest from your toilsome duties: rest in Him. “We that
believe do enter into rest.” As soon as thou seest the atonement finished, say, “It is done,
it is done!” Then there was another thing which always happened. When the priest had
made the atonement, it was usual for him, after he had washed himself, to come out
again in his glorious garments. When the people saw him they attended him to his house
with joy, and they offered burnt-offerings of praise on that day: he being thankful that
his life was spared, and they being thankful that the atonement was accepted; both of
them offering burnt-offerings as a type that they desired now to be “a living sacrifice,
holy and acceptable unto God.” The atonement is finished; the High Priest is gone within
the veil; salvation is now complete. He has laid aside the linen garments, and He stands
before you with His breastplate, and His mitre, and His embroidered vest, in all His
glory. Hear how He rejoices over us, for He hath redeemed His people, and ransomed
them out of the hands of His enemies. Come, let us go home with the High Priest; let us
clap our hands with joy, for He liveth; the atonement is accepted, and we are accepted
too; the scapegoat is gone, our sins are gone with it. Let us, then, go to our houses with
thankfulness, and let us come up to His gates with praise, for He hath loved His people,
33

34. He hath blessed His children, and given unto us a day of atonement, and a day of
acceptance, and a year of jubilee. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Moses and Christ; the Day of Atonement
I. The divine redeemer.
1. His humiliation.
2. His sinlessness.
II. The divine sacrifice.
1. God admits vicarious suffering into His righteous rule.
(1) Involuntarily we suffer for one another.
(2) The finer instincts of the animal world lead the parent to endure suffering
and death to shield and save the young.
(3) Voluntarily, man interposes to rescue his brother by his own loss and
suffering.
(4) In proportion to the spiritual nobility of men we find voluntary vicarious
suffering in their hearts and lives.
2. The sacrifice of Christ avails to remove all condemnation.
III. The human worshipper—Our sinning, seeking selves.
1. Without personal participation everything will be as nothing.
2. The spirit in which we must participate is that of penitence and faith. (W.
Clarkson, B. A.)
The Day of Atonement
Now, what did such a ritual mean? If it be said that the Divine forgiveness depended
upon such a day, then why did the world wait twenty-five hundred years before its
appointment? If absolutely necessary, why was it not enjoined upon Abraham, and
especially upon Adam in Paradise? What is the meaning of sacrifice? What relation does
it bear to forgiveness of sin? We observe—
1. God’s character is not changed by sacrifices. He neither regards sin with less
hatred, nor loves the sinner more because of these. The Sacrifice of Calvary—
compared with which all others are as shadows to the light—was the natural outcome
of the Divine nature, rather than the means of changing that nature (Rom_5:8; 1Jn_
4:9-10).
2. These mere sacrifices possessed no intrinsic value. If there were a value in these, it
must have been either to Him in whose name they are offered, or to man for whom
they were offered. Happily for us the Scriptures settle both points (Isa_1:13; Mic_
6:6-8; Psa_40:6; Psa_51:16-17). Thus much, therefore, follows: these sacrifices were
not transactions of any intrinsic value to God, in themselves considered. Every part
of that ceremonial for the childhood age was a Divine lesson, pointing to a greater
34

35. offering and sacrifice to come. While God accommodated His laws to the perception
of childhood, He made use of them to proclaim eternal truths—a fact we shall see
illustrated in the lessons of the Day of Atonement. In it we have—
I. The divine testimony against sin.
II. The basis of atonement.
III. The necessity for a perfect high priest. (D. O. Mears.)
The climax of sacrificial worship—the Day of Atonement
I. There is the voluntary humiliation of the high priest. The Day of Atonement was the
high priest’s day: he undertook the atoning work, and no man was to venture near the
Tabernacle (Lev_16:17) while he was engaged in it. The first thing required of him was
humiliation.
II. The high priest was required next to perfume the audience-chamber with incense.
Prayer is the beginning, middle, and end of the redemptive work. It seems evident from
this that we must put away those business-like illustrations of atonement as a hard
bargain driven on the one side and paid literally and in full on the other. We must allow
a sufficient sphere in our conceptions for the play of intercession and appeal, and
remember that while it is a God of justice who is satisfied, He proves Himself in the
transaction a God of grace.
III. After the incense there is brought in the blood, first of his own sin-offering and then
of the people’s. The blood of Jesus Christ is symbolised by both, and the act of sprinkling
it before God is also to be attributed to our great High Priest. The law of mediation is
that self-sacrifice stimulates the element of mercy in the Judge. And if it be objected that
surely God does not require such an expensive stimulant, the reply is, that the self-
sacrificing Son and the stimulated Father and Judge are in essence one. The act is
consequently a Divine self-sacrifice to stimulate the element of mercy towards man and
make it harmonise with justice.
IV. But the high priest was expected not only to secure the pardon of sin, but also to put
it away by the dismissal of the scapegoat. For the pardon of sin is not all man needs. He
requires sin to be put away from him. Now this putting away of sin was beautifully
represented in the dismissal of the scapegoat. This second sin-offering, after having the
sins of the people heaped upon its head by the priestly confession, is sent away in care of
a faithful servant in the wilderness, there to be left in loneliness either to live or die. Here
again we have a type of Jesus.
V. The high priest having thus disposed of sin, resumed his glorious garments and
offered the burnt-offerings for himself and the people. It is Christ who offers this burnt-
offering, and is the Burnt-offering. That is to say, He has offered for men a perfect
righteousness, as well as afforded us a perfect example. Our consecration to God is
ideally to be a perfect one—but really how imperfect! But Christ is made unto us
sanctification; we are complete in Him; we are accepted in the beloved; and we learn and
try to live as He lived, holy as He was holy. Moreover, upon the burnt-offering was
presented the fat of the sin-offering, the Lord thus emphasising His satisfaction with the
atonement, and His acceptance of it.
VI. The washing of the three men officiating on the day of atonement conveys surely the
35

36. idea of the contaminating power of sin. (R. M.,Edgar, M. A.)
The Day of Atonement
I. The authority for the day and its measures.
1. Both authorised of God (Lev_16:1-2).
2. Both, then, Divinely important.
(1) In regard to the definiteness of the day.
(2) In regard to the meaning and order of its ceremonies.
II. The typical meaning of the jewish atonement-day.
1. The Divinely stated reason for its appointment (Lev_16:16).
(1) The fact of sin and the necessity for its expiation by blood.
(2) Sin necessitates atonement if it is to be pardoned.
(3) This fact bespeaks the antagonism of sin against the Divine will, and the
holiness and righteousness of the Divine character.
2. The Divinely appointed measures for its observance.
(1) In respect to the agent.
(2) In respect to the measures themselves.
Lessons:
1. The hatefulness, heinousness, and guiltiness of sin are here shown.
2. God’s desire to provide for the removal of its guilt, and the prevention of its
consequences, demonstrated.
3. The comprehensiveness of the provision in the atonement. (D. C. Hughes, M. A.)
The Day of Atonement -
I. Note the chief services of the day of atonement.
II. Show that the sacrifices then offered were strictly propitiatory. When you consider
the two goats as together constituting the sin-offering, you must receive as the only
satisfactory account of the transaction that which sets forth the scapegoat as exhibiting
the effects of the expiation which was represented by the death of the other. The sins of
the people were laid upon the head of the scapegoat, and borne away to the wilderness;
but this scapegoat was a part of the sin-offering, and therefore, by combining the parts
of the sin-offering, you have before you both the means and the effect: you have the
means, the shedding of blood without which there is no remission; you have the effect,
the removal of guilt, so that iniquity, though searched for, can nowhere be found. It
seems certain that such was the view entertained by the Jews, who were wont to treat the
scapegoat as actually an accursed thing. Though not commanded by the law, they used
to maltreat the gnat Azazel—for by this name was the scapegoat known—to spit upon
36

37. him, and pluck off his hair. Thus they acted towards the goat as they acted towards
Christ, who, in a truer sense than the Azazel, was “made sin for us.” And if further proof
were needed of the idea which the Jews themselves attached to the ceremony of the
imposition of hands on the head of the victim, it is to be found in the forms of confession
which their writers have transmitted as used ordinarily in expiatory sacrifices. It
appears, for example, that when an individual presented his own sacrifice, he laid his
hands on the head of the offering, saying amongst other things, “Let this victim be my
expiation”—words which were universally considered equivalent to an entreaty that evils
which ought in justice to have alighted upon the offender might fall upon the sacrifice.
And it is every way worthy of note, as marking the traditional idea of the great day of
expiation, that the modern Jews, as well as the ancient, hold fast the notion of a strict
propitiatory atonement. Where, then, can be the ground for doubting, that by
“atonement,” in our text, is to be understood what we understand by it in Christian
phraseology; that there was effected a real removal of guilt and its consequences from
the Jewish transgressor, when on the great and solemn day of expiation, in compliance
with a Divine statute an atonement was made for the children of Israel for all their sins
once every year?
III. And here we bring you back to the main argument we have all along had in hand—
the inferring from the character of the legal sacrifice that of the Christian. If you can
once show that the sacrifices of the law typify the sacrifice of Christ, and that the
sacrifices of the law were strictly propitiatory, it follows as an irresistible deduction—
notwithstanding the cavils of philosophising sects—that the Lamb of God died truly as a
Sin-offering, making, by His death, atonement for the world. Indeed, if no reference
were made to the Old Testament, the language of the New is so explicit that nothing but
the most determined prepossession could fail to find in it the doctrine that Christ’s death
was a propitiatory sacrifice. But the connection between the two dispensations, and
therefore the two Testaments, is so strict in every point, that it were no just examination
of the gospel which would keep the law out of sight; therefore we come to examine more
definitely the correspondence between the sacrifice of the Saviour and those which have
just been reviewed. (H. Melvill, B. D.)
The Day of Atonement
By referring to Lev_16:29, you will find that this Day of Atonement was appointed for
“the seventh month.” Seven, as you remember, is a symbol of completeness. This
location of these solemnities in the seventh month, would therefore seem to refer to the
fact noted by the apostle, that it was only “when the fulness of the time was come, God
sent forth His Son to redeem them that were under the law.” He lived when the world
was sufficiently at peace to give Him a hearing—when the human mind was maturely
developed, and competent to investigate His claims—when the ways were sufficiently
open for the immediate universal promulgation of His gospel—and when the experience
of four thousand years was before men to prove to them how much they needed such a
Teacher and Priest as He. His appearance, therefore, to take away our sins, was in “the
fulness of time”—in the Tisri or September of the world—when everything was mature
and ripe. He put the Day of Atonement in “the seventh month.” You will also notice that
this great expiation service occurred but once in a complete revolution of time—“once a
year.” A year is a full and complete period. There is no time which does not fall within
the year. And the occurrence of the Day of Atonement but once in the entire year plainly
37

38. pointed to another great fact noted by the apostle, that “Christ was once offered to bear
the sins of many.” There is no repetition in His sacrificial work. “Christ was once
offered”; and in that one offering of Himself, all the eras of human existence were
condensed and included. It was the event of this world’s year. It is also to be observed,
that the atoning services of this remarkable day had respect to the whole nation at once.
They were “to make an atonement for the priests, and for all the people of the
congregation.” Most of the other offerings were personal, having respect to particular
individuals, and to special cases of sin, uncleanness, or anxiety. But on this day the
offerings were general, and the atonement had respect to the entire people. This recalls
another great evangelic truth, namely, that Christ “died for all”—“gave Himself a ransom
for all”—“by the grace of God tasted death for every man”—and “is the propitiation for
the sins of the whole world.”
I. It was to the high priest a day which imposed numerous inconveniences, anxieties,
and humiliations. And so was it with our great High Priest when He undertook to
expiate the guilt of man. Separated from His heavenly home, He became a suffering,
laborious, self-denying servant. No gold glittered upon His brow, or tinkled with His
steps, or mingled its glory with royal colours to adorn His robe. No jewelry sparkled on
his shoulders or on His breast. No chariots of grandeur bore Him to the place of His
mighty deeds of love. And thus amid privations, humiliations, and anxieties which made
Him sorrowful even unto death, did He go through with the services of the great day of
the world’s expiation.
2. It was to the high priest a day which imposed all its services upon him alone.
Thus, when Jesus undertook the expiation of the world’s guilt, “of the people, there
was none with Him.” Isaiah says, “I looked, and there was none to help.” His “own
arm brought salvation.” He “His own self bore our sins in His own body on the tree.”
3. The Day of Atonement was to the high priest also a very oppressive and
exhausting day. His duties, in his complete isolation, were really crushing. So
laborious and trying was his work that after it was over the people gathered round
him with sympathy and congratulation that he was brought through it in safety. But
it was only a picture of that still more crushing load which was laid upon our great
High Priest when making atonement for the sins of the world. None among all the
sons of the mighty could ever have performed the work which He performed, and
lived. All His life through there was a weight upon Him so heavy, and ever pressing
so mightily upon His soul, that there is no account that He ever smiled. Groans and
tears and deep oppression accompanied Him at almost every step. And when we
come to view Him in His agonising watchings and prayers in the garden, and under
the burdens of insult and wrong which were heaped upon Him in the halls of
judgment, and struggling with His load along that dolorous way until the muscles of
His frame yielded, and He fell faint upon the ground, and oppressed upon the Cross
until His inmost soul uttered itself in cries which startled the heavens and shook the
world; we have an exhibition of labour, exhaustion, and distress, at which we may
well sit down and gaze, and wonder, and weep, in mere sympathy with a sorrow and
bitterness beyond all other sorrow.
II. We come now to look at the atonement itself. Here we find that several kinds of
offerings were to be made. The object was to make the picture complete, by bringing out
in different offerings what could not all be expressed by one. They were only different
phases of the same unity, pointing to the one offering of Jesus “Christ, who, through the
eternal Spirit, offered Himself without spot to God.” There is a multiplication of victims,
38

39. that we may see the amplitude and varied applications of the one great atonement
effected by Christ Jesus. The most vital, essential, and remarkable of these atoning
services was that relating to the two goats, as provided for in verses 7-10, 15-17, 21, 22.
One of these goats was to be slain as a sin-offering, and the other was to have the sins of
Israel laid upon its head, and then to be taken away alive and left in the wilderness. The
one typified the atonement of Christ in its means and essence; the other the same
atonement in its effects.
III. A word now with regard to the people to be benefited by the services Of this
remarkable day. That the services and offerings of this day were meant for the entire
Jewish nation is very clear and distinct. But not all were therefore reconciled and
forgiven. The efficacy of these services, in any given case, depended upon the individual
himself. The atonement day was to be a day of contrition, of weeping, of soul-sorrow for
sin, of confession, reformation, and return to God, a day of heart-melting and charity.
Without these accompaniments its oblations were vain, its incense useless, its
solemnities but idle ceremonies. And, as it was with the type, so it is with the Antitype.
Would you, then, have Christ’s atoning day to be a blessing to thy soul, come to it with a
moved and melting heart; come to it with thy spirit bowed for thy many, many sins;
come to it as the humbled prodigal came back to the kind father he had wronged; come
to it as the poor heart-broken publican came, smiting thy guilty breast and crying, “God
be merciful to me a sinner!” (J. A. Seiss, D. D.)
The ceremonies of the Day of Atonement
The Day of Atonement was one of the most interesting, as it was perhaps the most
solemn and impressive, of all the holy days of the Jews. For seven days previously the
high priest had been making preparation for taking up his abode within the Temple
precincts. The services of the day began with the first grey light of dawn; for then the
high priest, after performing the ordinary morning service, arrayed himself in his fine
white liner garments and prepared to go within the awful sanctuary where the Shechinah
dwelt. But first he must confess his own sins, and so he lays his hand upon the head of
the bullock, which was to be for his sin-offering, and said, “O Jehovah, I have committed
iniquity, I have sinned, I and my house.” Ten times in this prayer he repeated the name
of Jehovah—a word which had an awful significance in the ears of every Jew; and every
time he repeated it, those who stood near cast themselves with their faces to the ground,
while the multitude responded, “Blessed be the name; the glory of His kingdom is for
ever and ever.” “After some other ceremonies,” says Edersheim, “advancing to the altar
of burnt-offering, he next filled the censer with burning coals, and then ranged a handful
of frankincense in the dish destined to hold it. Every eye was now strained toward the
sanctuary as, slowly bearing the censer and the incense, the figure of the white-robed
priest was seen to disappear within the Holy Place—the place that had never been visited
by any other except the high priest, and which he had not seen for a full twelvemonth.
After that nothing further could be seen of his movements. The curtain of the most Holy
Place was folded back, and he stood alone and separated from all the people in that awful
gloom of the holiest of all, only lit up by the red glow of the coals in the priest’s censer.”
What a sight met his eyes as they became accustomed to the gloom!—the mercy-seat; on
either side the outstretched wings of the cherubim; and above them the visible presence
of Jehovah in the cloud of the Shechinah. He whose name alone, in after-years, the Jews
dared not pronounce was there, and upon him, revealed in the cloud, gazed the white-
39

40. robed priest as he stood alone in that awful presence. Then, when the smoke of the
incense filled the place, came this prayer from the lips of the priest: “May it please thee,
O Lord our God, and the God of our fathers, that neither this day nor during this year
any captivity come upon us. Yet if captivity befall us this day or this year, let it be to a
place where the law is cultivated. May it please Thee, O Lord our God, and the God of
our fathers, that want come not upon us either this day or this year. But if want visit us
this day or this year, let it be due to the liberality of our charitable deeds.” After further
prayer and other ceremonies the priest returned to the people, and then began perhaps
the most unique and interesting service of the day—the sending away of the scapegoat.
Earlier in the day two goats, as similar in all respects as could be found, were chosen;
lots were cast upon their heads, one being reserved for a sacrifice, the other to be sent
into the wilderness. Upon the horns of the latter a piece of scarlet cloth or “tongue” was
tied, telling of the guilt it had to bear. After the sacrificing of the first animal the priest
laid both his hands upon the head of the second and confessed the sins of the people. “O
Jehovah, they have committed iniquity; they have transgressed; they have sinned,” &c.
“Then,” as Edersheim further says, “a strange scene would be witnessed. The priest led
the sin-burdened goat out through Solomon’s Porch and, as tradition has it, through the
Eastern Gate, which opened upon the Mount of Olives. Here an arched bridge spanned
the intervening valley, and over it they brought the goat to the Mount of Olives, where
one specially appointed took him in charge.” The distance between Jerusalem and the
beginning of the wilderness was divided into ten stations, where one or more persons
were placed to offer refreshment to the man leading the goat, and then to accompany
him to the next station. At last they reached the wilderness, and their arrival was
telegraphed by the waving of flags from one station back to another until in a few
minutes “it was known in the Temple and whispered from ear to ear that the goat had
borne upon him all their iniquities into a land not inhabited.” (F. E. Clark.)
Spiritual significance of the ceremonies on the Day of Atonement
We cannot regard the symbolical arrangements of this Day of Atonement without feeling
that it is a matter of supreme importance, of urgent, indispensable necessity, that some
means be devised whereby man may be separated, and separated for ever, from his
sins—their guilt, their power, their memory. All the ceremonies of this day declare this
fact, as do all the arrangements of the old economy, and indeed all the utterances of
God’s Word. What is the meaning of those abortive attempts to discover some
scapegoat, who, if he cannot wholly bear, may at least share the burden and the blame?
The religions and the irreligions, the beliefs and the infidelities of men declare the same
fact with unmistakable plainness. Nothing can be more evident than that men have the
haunting consciousness of sin, from which they seek to escape; some in one way, some in
another. Man everywhere has knowledge enough of sin to feel that it would be indeed a
good thing to be separated, if not from sin itself (and from that the sinner is not willing
to part) at least from those wretched, miserable consequences which follow in its train.
Turning away from the vain and fruitless efforts of men in this direction, we find that
what is impossible with men is possible with God. We find, indeed, that God has
interposed in a very wonderful way to secure this result—the separation of man from
Bin, and all the hateful and deadly consequences of sin, and that by the sacrifice and
substitution of His own Son, our Saviour. And the arrangements of the Day of
Atonement were Divinely ordered that they might prefigure, in its character and
consequences, that true atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ—that complete and finished
40

41. sacrifice offered once for all by Him, “who is a priest, not according to the law of a carnal
commandment, but according to the power of an endless life”—“a priest for ever, after
the order of Melchizelek.” And, as we have already remarked, our attention is especially
directed to two things—the means of atonement, and the result, the consequences of
atonement; in other words, to the sacrifice for sin, and the separation from it. We have a
picture of the one in the goat slain and the blood sprinkled; we have a picture of the
other in the leading forth into the wilderness of the sin-burdened goat, to return no
more. The truth to which there is need for the most express testimony to be borne is the
atonement of Christ—atonement by means of blood-shedding and blood-sprinkling.
Whether men bear or forbear, whether it seem to them wisdom or foolishness, we must
everywhere proclaim the same truth, that the only atonement made known in God’s
Word is atonement by sacrifice by the substitutionary sacrifice of God’s own Son. (T. M.
Morris.)
The garments of the priest
They were of pure white linen. The ordinary “golden garments” were laid aside, for only
the vestments of snowy purity must be worn when the high priest enters into the Holy of
Holies. The most extraordinary care, too, must be taken to avoid defilement of every
kind. Five times during the Day of Atonement must the priest bathe his whole body; ten
times must he wash his feet; many times must he change his garments. These
precautions, at first thought, seem to our modern views unnecessary and finical, but
when we remember Him to whom all these symbols point, what type can express His
purity who was holy, harmless, and undefiled; who lived among sinners yet without sin;
who lived in leprous Judaea yet without spot or taint of leprosy? The sinlessness of
Christ! What can typify it? The snow, perhaps we think, as it falls from the laboratory of
the clouds, each flake a crystal of exquisite form and all covering with a fleecy mantle
every brown, dirty, unsightly thing in the landscape. But the snow itself, when it touches
earth, soon becomes defiled. The lamb washed in the running stream soon loses his
purity; the high priest himself, even for a single day, could not keep his garments
unpolluted, but must change them and wash his flesh over and over and over; but our
High Priest came and lived among sinners for three-and-thirty years, and yet knew no
sin. Pure as was the priest’s linen robe, it is but a poor, faulty representative of the robe
of righteousness of our High Priest. (F. E. Clark.)
There shalt be no man in the Tabernacle . . . when he goeth in to make an
atonement
When sin is to be accounted for, we must face God each for himself, coming alone, one
by one, into His presence. Friends and loved ones can be with us in sinning, but not in
answering for sin. Help and cheer and sympathy can be given to us by our fellows, up to
the time when we are to meet God and give an account of ourselves; then “every one of
us shall give account of himself to God,” then “every man shall bear his own burden,”
then “every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour,” then “every
man’s work shall be made manifest, for the day shall declare it, because it shall be
revealed by fire, and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.” How we lean
on human helpers: children on parents, husband and wife on one another, scholar on
teacher, people on pastor, friend on friend! But there shall be no one of these earthly
41

42. supporters with us when we enter the holy place of God’s presence, seeking an
atonement for our sins. Then we must stand alone, face to face with God. (H. C.
Trumbull.)
Trusting in the Substitute
A good old Christian woman in humble life was once asked, as she lay on her dying
pillow, the ground of her hope for eternity. She replied, with great composure, “I rely on
the justice of God”; but seeing that the reply excited surprise, added, “Justice, not to me,
but to my Substitute, in whom I trust.”
A proffered substitute
During the Franco-Prussian War, an English clergyman was travelling in the district
occupied by the German army. There he met a German gentleman, whose route lay in
the same direction, and quickly becoming friends, they resolved to accompany each
other. As they walked out one day they saw a small company of soldiers come out of the
camp with a handcuffed prisoner in their midst. Wondering what was about to be done,
they waited until the party had approached, then asked the officer what they were going
to do with that man. “Shoot him.” “Why?” “He has been robbing the dead, and by the
law of the land he must die.” “Poor man,” said the clergyman, “is he prepared to die?” “I
do not know,” replied the officer, “but you can speak to him if you like.” The minister at
once took advantage of the permission, and began to speak to the prisoner about his
soul. He had not spoken long when the wretched man burst into tears. The clergyman
stopped, thinking something he had said had broken him down, but he was speedily
undeceived by the man exclaiming, “Oh, sir, I am not weeping because of anything you
have said, or because I am going to die; I am weeping because I do not know what will
become of my wife and children when I am gone.” These words touched the old German
gentleman, who said as he gazed with tears in his eyes at the prisoner, “I tell you what. I
have no one in the world to feel my loss. I shall take your place, and as your law demands
a life I shall lay down mine.” And turning to the officer, he continued, “Now, please, take
off these handcuffs and put them on me.” “But,” interposed the Englishman, “think what
you are doing; is there no one who will miss you?” “No one.” “Well,” said the officer, as
soon as he had recovered from his amazement, “I have no power to do what you wish,
but you can come to the camp and hear what the general says.” But it turned out the
general had not the power: the general, however, said, “The Crown Prince is here, and he
has the power.” To the Crown Prince they went, and when he heard the strange story he
was very much affected. “Our laws,” he said, “will not admit of a substitute being
executed for another, but though I cannot take your life, I can give you a present of this
man’s life. He is yours.” The prince could pardon, but God cannot pardon without a
Substitute, even Jesus who died in our stead that we might live. (W. Thompson.)
Need for the great atonement
Mr. Hardcastle, when dying, said, “My last act of faith I wish to be to take the blood of
Jesus, as the high priest did when he entered behind the veil; and when I have passed
the veil I would appear with it before the throne.” So, in making the transit from one
year to another, this is our most appropriate exercise. We see much sin in the retrospect;
we see many a broken purpose, many a misspent hour, many a rash and unadvised
42

43. word; we see much pride and anger, and worldliness and unbelief; we see a long track of
inconsistency. There is nothing for us but the great atonement. With that atonement let
us, like believing Israel, end and begin anew. Bearing its precious blood, let us pass
within the veil of a solemn and eventful future. Let a visit to the fountain be the last act
of the closing year, and let a new year still find us there. (J. Hamilton, D. D.)
Christ’s anesthesia for the remembrance of sin
If the Creator of the universe has provided in nature an anaesthesia for physical pain,
shall He not much more, in grace, provide one for moral pain? There is a wholesome and
necessary pain for both the physical and the moral natures—the pain which gives
warning of the disease, or indicates its presence; but when the physician comes, his
province is to effect the cure without the pain as far as possible, as it is a retarding
element in the process of recovery, exhausting the patient’s strength, which is all needed
for recuperation. Just such a useless devitalising pain for the soul would be the eternal
regretful remembrance of sin, therefore it is that God declares, “Your sins and
transgressions shall not be remembered nor come into mind”; “Blessed is he whose
transgression is covered”; “Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as
snow.” “As far as the east is from the west, so far will I remove thy transgressions from
thee”; “I will not look upon them nor remember them.” And yet in this age of
questioning people say, “How shall I not remember when science tells me memory is
indestructible?” As well may the patient in his incredulity ask, “How shall I not feel the
knife penetrating to the bone, when the mere scratch of a pin gives me pain?” Christ is
the anaesthesia for the soul’s regretful remembrance of sin.
Sinners always ready to conceal their sin
It is said of the elephant that before he drinks in the river he troubleth the water with his
feet, that so he may not see his own deformity, and it is usual with such as are well struck
in years, not so much to mind the looking-glass, lest therein they behold nothing but
hollow eyes, pale cheeks, and a wrinkled front, the ruins of a sometime more beautiful
visage. Thus it is that men by nature are hardly drawn to the confession of their sins, but
every man is ready to hide his sins by excusing them with Aaron, by colouring them with
fair pretences, as did the Jews, by laying them on others as Adam did, or by denying
them with Solo-men’s harlots; they are ready to decline sin through all the eases, as one
said wittily: in the nominative by pride, in the genitive by luxury, in the dative by
bribery, in the accusative by detraction, in the vocative by adulation, in the ablative by
extortion, but very loth to acknowledge them in any case, very hardly brought to make
any confession of them at all. (T. Adams.)
Value of repentance
In the country of Arabia, where almost all trees are savoury, and frankincense and myrrh
are even as common firewood, styrax is sold at a dear rate, though it be a wood of
unpleasant smell, because experience proveth it to be a present remedy to recover their
smell, who before had lost it. We all of us have lived in the pleasures of sin, have our
senses stuffed and debilitated, if not overcome; and the best remedy against this malady
will be the smelling to styrax, the unsavoury and unpleasing smell of our former
corruptions; thus David’s sin was ever before him, and St. Augustine (as Possidonius
43

44. noteth), a little before his death, caused the penitential psalms to be written about his
bed, which he still looking upon, out of a bitter remembrance of his sins, continually
wept, giving not over long before he died. This practice will work repentance not to be
repented of. (J. Spencer.)
Christian’s confession of sin
You may have noticed in the biography of some eminent men how badly they speak of
themselves. Robert Southey, in his “Life of Bunyan,” seems at a difficulty to understand
how John Bunyan could have used such depreciating language concerning his own
character. For it is true, according to all we know of his biography, that he was not,
except in the case of profane swearing, at all so bad as most of the villagers. Indeed,
there were some virtues in the man which were worthy of all commendation. Southey
attributes it to a morbid state of mind, but we rather ascribe it to a return of spiritual
health. The great light which shone around Saul of Tarsus brighter than the midday sun,
was the outward type of that inner light which flashes into a regenerate soul, and reveals
the horrible character of the sin which dwells within. Believe me, when you hear
Christians making confessions which seem to you to be unnecessarily abject, it is not
that they are worse than others, but that they see themselves in a clearer light than
others. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Hindrances to repentance removed
They who have water running home in conduit pipes to their houses, as soon as they find
a want of that which their neighbours have in abundance, by and by they search into the
causes, run to the conduit-head, or take up the pipes to see where they be stopped, or
what is the defect, that so they may be supplied accordingly. Even so must every man do,
when he finds that the grace of repentance flows into other men’s hearts, and hath no
recourse or access into his soul, by and by sit down and search himself what the cause
should be, where the hindrance is that stays the course, where the rub lies which
stoppeth the grace of repentance in him, seeing they that live lit may be) in the same
house, sit at the same table, lie in the same bed, they can be penitent for their sins, sorry
that they have offended God, and so complain in bitterness of soul for their sins; but he
that had the same means, the same occasions, more sins to be humbled for, more time to
repent, and more motives to draw him to the duty, is not yet moved with the same, nor
any way affected with the sense of sin; this must needs be matter of high concernment to
look about him. (J. Spencer.)
True repentance
I think that men look upon repentance and humiliation before God very much as they do
upon a voyage from the tropics to the North Pole. Every single league as they advance
toward the Arctic region they leave more and more behind them greenness, and fruit,
and warmth, and civilisation, and find themselves more and more in the midst of
sterility, barrenness, ice, and barbarism. I think that men repent toward the frigid zones.
They think that to go to God is dreary and desolate in the extreme. It is not. The sinner is
an Esquimaux! He lives in ice and burrows underground, and is but little better than a
44

45. beast. But if by any means he becomes fired with a conception of a better clime, and
leaving his hibernating quarters, he takes the ship Repentance and sails toward the
torrid zone, at every league he is surprised by the new forms of vegetation by which he is
surrounded. He has seen oak-trees only about as high as his knee. Not long after he sets
out on his voyage he is astonished to see them as high as his head. By and by, as he
draws near the tropics, he is lost in wonder and ecstasy to see them lifting themselves far
above him in the air. And with what satisfaction does he compare the delightful home
that he has found with the miserable one that he has left behind. (H. W. Beecher.)
Two kids of the goats for a sin-offering.—
Christ typified by the two goats
I. As to the goat that was put to death. To die as a sacrifice for human guilt was the great
end of Christ’s life and mission into our world. Thus was He represented by the goat that
was sacrificed. Notice how the figure was still further carried out.
II. In the goat which was kept alive.
1. Over the head of this goat the sins of the people were confessed, and on it
symbolically laid. Thus Jesus came to be our Surety and Substitute.
2. Iniquities, transgressions, and sins, were confessed, and laid on the scapegoat.
Showing us here the extent of Christ’s sacrifice for all kinds of guilt, whether arising
from neglect of God’s commands or the wilful violation of His righteous
prohibitions. In the sacrifice of Christ there was an atonement for every kind of sin,
and for all grades and classes of sinners.
3. The scapegoat was dismissed into the wilderness with the imputed iniquity of the
people upon it. Thus has Jesus truly borne our guilt away. He has obtained for a
world of transgressors the offer of pardon. For the polluted race of Adam the means
of purity. For condemned and dying sinners the favour of God and the gift of eternal
life. Notice—
III. How the benefits of the scapegoat were conferred upon the people. Aaron was to lay
both his hands upon the head of the scapegoat, and there confess all the sins of the
people. How clearly does this show us the appointed medium by which we enjoy the
salvation of Christ.
1. There must be implicit faith or confidence in His person and sacrifice.
2. Faith in Jesus will ever be accompanied by sincere repentance. It will be
connected with ingenious confession, deep contrition, entire self-abasement, and
self-loathing before God, with earnest forsaking of the paths of impenitence and sin.
Application:
1. We see here the connection between sin and death. Sin deserves death, exposes to
death; where it is unforgiven it will involve in eternal death. “The soul that sinneth,”
&c.
2. In Christ’s death is the only real sacrifice for sin: “He died for our sins.” What a
glorious truth! How precious! how momentous!
3. Faith is the only medium of securing to the soul the benefits of that death. (J.
45

46. Burns, D. D.)
Lessons
1. Of the divers lots appointed for men, of some unto life, some unto death.
2. Ministers should have a great care to govern their families.
3. Christ alone sufficient to save us.
4. Remission of sins not procured by any strength in man, but by faith in Christ.
5. Righteousness not by the words of the law, but by faith only in Christ. (A. Willet,
D. D.)
Moral observations
1. Divine secrets not curiously to be searched into.
2. To approach and draw near before God with holiness and reverence.
3. Of the force and efficacy of prayer.
4. Of the profit and fruit of fasting.
5. Remission of sins only granted to the penitent.
6. Evil thoughts and lusts to be cast away. (A. Willet, D. D.)
The two goats
The two goats really formed one and the same figure—one was slain and one was led off
into the wilderness; but to typify that the figure was one, and the same, they must both
be exactly alike, they must cost the same price, they must be bought at the same time;
one was slain for sin, the other was led away far into the wilderness, bearing the sins of
all the people laid upon His head. Our Lord, in His life and death, combined both these
types. He was slain for sin and bears the sin away. There is one element of this
ceremonial that we must carefully note. The idea of vicarious sacrifice is very prominent.
This element must never be lost out of our doctrine of the atonement. An atonement
without the sacrifice is no atonement. “According to the law I may almost say all things
are cleansed with blood, and apart from the shedding of blood is no remission.” Bring
every beautiful thought and theory into the atonement that belongs there: the example,
the upholding of law, the lustral effect on man’s moral nature, are all there; but this is
there too. Through the vicarious sacrifice of the God Man our sins are borne for ever
away into the wilderness, and are remembered no more against us. (F. E. Clark.)
The two goats—various interpretations
There have been disputes about the interpretation of this. I may state that Faber, a very
acute and able critic upon Leviticus, thinks that the one goat was sacrificed for sin-
46

47. representing Christ’s death; that the scapegoat was dedicated to the evil spirit-
representing Christ put into the power of Satan to be tempted in the wilderness. The
reason that he thinks so is that the word for goat of “scape” is azazel; and that name was
applied to the fallen spirit by the Jews. And therefore Faber thinks it was one goat for a
sacrifice—to denote Christ’s atonement; the other goat let loose to Satan, or sent away to
Satan—to represent the Saviour given up into the hands of the wicked one to be tempted
for a season. The second interpretation is by Bush, the American commentator, a man of
great sagacity and talent; and he thinks that the one goat that was slain as a sacrifice
represented Christ’s atonement for us, but that the other goat represented the Jewish
races let loose, bearing the fearful responsibility of having trodden under foot the
precious blood of Christ, and crucified the Son of God, and stained their name and their
nation with the infamy of that crime; and that they, a blasted race, driven into the desert,
were represented by the scapegoat that was here let go. And he thinks on the same
ground, that when the lots were cast, and Jesus was condemned and Barabbas was let
go, that that was the carrying out of the same great symbol—Barabbas, the
representative of the Jews, let go, but branded with an inexpiable crime; and Jesus, the
Great Atonement sacrificed for the sins of all that believe. These criticisms, however, are
more plausible than true. I do think the old-fashioned interpretation is the just one, and
there is no valid reason for superseding it: that the one goat sacrificed on the altar was
the symbol of Christ our Saviour or Atonement sacrificed for us; and that the other goat
let loose into the desert was the symbol and representation to the children of Israel of
Jesus rising from the dead, bearing the sins that He had exhausted, entering into
heaven, and there ever living to make intercession for us. I know there are difficulties
even in accepting the last of these; but those difficulties, if they do not completely
vanish, are much diluted when you notice the accompaniments or the rites by which this
goat was let loose into the wilderness: that the priest was to lay his hands upon the head
of the scapegoat—the one that was presented alive; over it he was to confess all the sins
of the children of Israel, and then this scapegoat was let loose with the sins of Israel
upon its head. Now, the very phraseology that is applied to the scapegoat is applied to
Jesus: “Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away”—that carrieth away “the sins of the
world.” And I cannot conceive a more beautiful type of Christ our Saviour, or a more
expressive exhibition of the mode in which we become interested in Him than that of the
high priest laying his hand upon his head, transferring the sins of Israel to it, dismissing
it, and the sins blotted out, no more remembered, carried into a desert, passed away
from the reminiscences of Israel and of God for ever. (J. Cumming, D. D.)
The cloud of the incense.
Intercession of Christ
I. The doctrine of the intercession of Christ.
1. AS typically exhibited under the law.
2. As actually fulfilled in Christ. He not only suffered on the Cross, but ascended; not
on His own account, but ours. Illustrated by common analogies: as an advocate
appears on behalf of his clients; a king on behalf of his subjects; a general as
representative of his troops; a priest at the altar as representative of whole body of
worshippers; so Christ appears as the representative of all His believing people. As
our King He appears in beauty; as Captain of salvation appears victorious; as Elder
47

48. Brother; as Priest, Counsellor, Advocate. Grand expression of His love. Not content
to offer one life on the Cross. He consecrates His new existence. Though raised to the
throne of reverence, does not overlook His little flock (Joh_17:1-26.).
II. The benefits we derive from it.
1. The forgiveness of our sins. “If any man sin.” After all done for us, we are guilty
and undeserving. But while our sins are crying out against us on earth, Christ is
pleading in heaven.
2. Relief of our sorrows. Christ possesses a capacity of sympathy, especially in
mental distresses, tenderness of conscience, &c. Hannah prayed, but Eli’s heart was
not touched with feeling of her infirmity.
3. The acceptance of our duties. These are maimed and imperfect. Enough evil in
them to render them offensive and displeasing to God. But Christ presents them
(Rev_8:2).
4. The frustration of spiritual enemies. Satan is the avenger, but Christ is our
Advocate. “Peter, I have prayed for thee.” (S. Thodey.)
4 He is to put on the sacred linen tunic, with linen
undergarments next to his body; he is to tie the
linen sash around him and put on the linen
turban. These are sacred garments; so he must
bathe himself with water before he puts them on.
BARNES, "The high priest when he changed his dress on this day was required to
bathe himself. In his “golden garments” he had, on this day, and for the previous week,
to offer the regular daily sacrifices, and to perform the other sacerdotal duties of the
sanctuary, which were usually performed by a common priest. The dress of white linen,
which he now put on, appears to have been like the ordinary dress of the common
priests, except in the substitution of a linen mitre for the bonnet (or cap), and of a plain
linen girdle for the variegated one (Exo_28:40-43 notes). In preparing to enter the holy
of holies, he attired himself in spotless white as a token of the holiness without which
none, in a spiritual sense, can enter the divine presence. He thus became a more distinct
foreshadow of the greater high priest Heb_7:26; Heb_6:19-20. This significance
belonged to the high priest only in his official capacity as mediator: in his own person he
had infirmity, and was required “to offer up sacrifice, “first” for his own sins, and then
for the people’s.” Heb_7:27. See the notes at Lev_9:7-14. On the same ground it was
48

49. that, although as a mediator he had to enter the most holy place, as sinful man he
needed the cloud of incense as a veil to come between him and the holiness of Yahweh.
See Lev_16:13.
CLARKE, "He shall put on the holy linen coat - He was not to dress in his
pontifical garments, but in the simple sacerdotal vestments, or those of the Levites,
because it was a day of humiliation; and as he was to offer sacrifices for his own sins, it
was necessary that he should appear in habits suited to the occasion. Hence he has
neither the robe, the ephod, the breastplate, the mitre, etc.; these constituted his dress of
dignity as the high priest of God, ministering for others and the representative of Christ:
but now he appears, before God as a sinner, offering an atonement for his
transgressions, and his garments are those of humiliation.
GILL, "He shall put on the holy linen coat,.... Which he wore in common with
other priests:
and he shall have the linen breeches upon his flesh; upon those parts of his body
which are more secret, and less honourable flesh, meaning the same, as in Lev_15:2,
and shall be girded with a linen girdle and with the linen mitre shall he be
attired, as the other priests were; which were an emblem of the purity and holiness of
Christ, whereby he became a proper and suitable high priest, to make atonement for sin,
he having none in himself; and of his mean estate of humiliation afflictions, and
sufferings, whereby he expiated sin, and made reconciliation for iniquity; the high priest
on the day of atonement not appearing in his golden garments, as the Jews call others
worn by him, because there were some gold in them, as being unsuitable to a day of
affliction and humiliation, but in garments of flax, a meaner dress; and which also were
an emblem of the righteousness of Christ, and his saints, called fine linen, clean and
white; which is wrought out by him, as the author of it, is in him as the subject of it, and
worn by him as the Lord our righteousness, and in which, as the instilled head and
representative of his people, he entered into heaven to show it to his Father, and plead it
with him:
these are holy garments; and to be used only in sacred service: there were four more
holy garments besides these worn by the high priest, as the breastplate, the ephod, the
robe, and the plate of gold, and which also were put on at certain times on this day, as at
the offering of the morning and evening sacrifice, and at the slaying and offering of the
several creatures on this day (u), see Lev_16:23,
therefore shall he wash his flesh in water, and so put them on; by dipping, and
that in forty seahs of water, as the Targum of Jonathan; and this he did as often as he
changed his garments, which were no less than five times on this day. The tradition is
(w), no man goes into the court for service, even though clean, until he has dipped
himself: the high priest dips five times, and sanctifies, i.e. washes his hands and feet ten
times on that day, and all are done in the holy place, over the house of Parvah, excepting
this only, that is, first here: Jarchi on the text observes, on this day, he (the high priest)
49

50. is bound to dipping at every change, and five times he changes, and to two washings of
his hands and feet at the laver: this washing may be either an emblem of Christ's
baptism, which he submitted to before he entered on his public ministry, and was, by
dipping; or rather of his being cleared, acquitted, and justified from all sin, upon his
resurrection from the dead, after he had made atonement for it, and before his entrance
into heaven; as he had no sin of his own he needed not the washing of regeneration, or
the water of sanctifying grace to be sprinkled on him, to cleanse him from it but
inasmuch as he had sin imputed to him, and which he took upon him to make
atonement for, it was proper and necessary, when he had made it, that he should be
justified in the Spirit, that so he might enter into heaven without sin imputed, as he will
appear without it when he comes a second time.
HENRY, "The attire of the high priest in this service. He was not to be dressed up in
his rich garments that were peculiar to himself: he was not to put on the ephod, with the
precious stones in it, but only the linen clothes which he wore in common with the
inferior priests, Lev_16:4. That meaner dress did best become him on this day of
humiliation; and, being thinner and lighter, he would in it be more expedite for the work
or service of the day, which was all to go through his hands. Christ, our high priest, made
atonement for sin in our nature; not in the robes of his own peculiar glory, but the linen
garments of our mortality, clean indeed, but mean.
COKE, "Leviticus 16:4. He shall put on the holy linen coat— This being a day of
humiliation, Leviticus 16:29 the high-priest was not to be clothed, as usual, in his
peculiar garments, but in those of the common priests: and, probably, these linen
garments were designed to suggest not the humiliation only, but the purity which
the present solemn occasion was intended to inculcate: to which every ceremony
seems to lead; particularly the washing himself entirely with water.
REFLECTIONS.—Aaron had sustained a heavy loss in his two sons, and might well
fear to minister before such a jealous God. He is therefore now to begin to make the
annual atonement for himself and his house, as well as for the people. One day in a
year must he come before the mercy-seat, where God appeared in the cloud; and
then alone, with the blood of the sin-offering, in his ordinary garments of service, to
denote that, as a sinner, he was on a footing with his brethren. Such was the
bondage, darkness, and distance of that dispensation. But now, since Jesus is once
for us entered, every believer has boldness and access to the mercy-seat continually;
and, instead of fearing death from the presence of the Lord, finds his nearness the
true and happy life of his soul.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 4
(4) He shall put on the holy linen coat.—Better, a holy linen tunic. The four articles
of clothing here mentioned, all of which were of white linen, constituted the
sacerdotal “white vestments,” in contra-distinction to “the golden garments.” Of the
white garments he possessed two sets, one of Egyptian linen, and the other of Indian
and less costly linen. The community allowed the high priest thirty minæ to
50

51. purchase these garments, and he could add as much as he liked from his own money
if he wished them to be more costly, provided the material was linen made of six
double twisted threads and of flax. It was the more costly vestments of Egyptian
linen which the high priest wore on this occasion. The latter he put on in the after
part of the day when he entered the Holy of Holies to bring out the censer. These
garments were the same as those of the ordinary priests, except the turban, which
was a little taller.
And he shall wash.—He had to bathe his body every time when he changed his
vestments.
PETT, "Verse 4
“He shall put on the holy linen coat, and he shall have the linen breeches on his
flesh, and shall be girded with the linen girdle, and with the linen mitre shall he be
attired. They are the holy garments. And he shall bathe his flesh in water, and put
them on.”
But before presenting these the High Priest had to divest himself of his normal
Priestly garments and, after thoroughly washing himself, put on the special
garments only used on the Day of Atonement. These were pure white, and consisted
of the holy linen coat, the linen breeches covering his ‘flesh’ (his unseemly parts), the
linen girdle, and the linen headdress. These were the holy garments. And before
donning them he had to wash himself thoroughly with water, this is spite of the fact
that he had already offered the morning sacrifice and had probably not left the
tabernacle since. All traces of earthiness had to be removed. He was about to enter
the Holy of Holies.
The reason for having to wear these special garments was probably: 1). Because
they had to be pristine in order for him to enter the Holy of Holies. His ‘every-day’
High Priestly clothes, in all their splendour, were not sufficient. They were tainted.
2) Because he could not enter God’s presence on that day in garments ‘for glory and
for beauty’ because he was coming as a penitent sinner and a suppliant. 3). Because
this was a day on which he and Israel would be made ‘white’. 4). To emphasise the
holiness of life required of the High Priest.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:4. He shall put on the holy linen coat — Upon other days,
when the high-priest officiated, he was bound to put on all the garments mentioned
Exodus 28:4, four of which were called golden garments, because there was a
mixture of gold in them; but on this day he put on only the four linen garments here
specified, which were common to him with the ordinary priests. The reason whereof
was, that this was not a day of feasting and rejoicing, but of mourning and
humiliation, at which times people were to lay aside their ornaments. At this solemn
season the high- priest was to wear nothing but linen, and that probably not only in
token of humiliation, but also because it is a more proper emblem of purity than
woollen, as it is more easily cleansed, and washes whiter. These are holy
51

52. garments — Peculiarly so; to be used only when he was in the exercise of this solemn
part of his sacred office. Therefore shall he wash his flesh in water — Besides the
washing of his hands and feet, as upon other days, at the beginning of the service,
the high-priest was, on this day, to wash his whole body before he put on these holy
garments, and entered on the solemn service of the day; which significant rite fitly
betokened that peculiar holiness and purity which become all that approach God in
his worship, and especially all that minister in holy things.
WHEDON, " 4. The holy linen coat — This requirement, that Aaron should divest
himself of his pontifical robes when he appears before the Lord as a penitent,
teaches us that no worldly distinction, no ecclesiastical preferment, is of any avail to
avert the wrath of God. When Aaron represents God to men he may well be clothed
with splendour, but when as a sinner he stands before the divine holiness, that
splendour pales. The day of atonement stained the glory of all flesh by the revelation
of Jehovah’s holiness in contrast with man’s guilt.
Breeches — Properly, drawers. See Leviticus 6:10, note. The high priest is required
to appear in the apparel of a common priest, with the addition of a linen mitre, a
distinctive badge of the pontificate. This change of raiment represents a humiliation
as deep as does the wearing of sackcloth upon the common people.
Wash his flesh — It became the typical high priest to be “holy, harmless, and
undefiled,”
that he might fitly prefigure the spotless Son of God. It was customary to remove
him from his own house to a chamber in the temple seven days before, lest he should
contract any defilement which might entail an uncleanness during those seven days,
and he be disqualified for his duty on the great day of atonement. During this time
he was exercised in all the various parts of the service, though not entering within
the veil. The law relating to his duties was read to him again and again, lest he
should make any mistake in his office on that day to his own destruction and the
detriment of the people. The elders of the Sanhedrin solemnly adjured him in these
words: “We adjure thee, O high priest, our delegate, by Him that caused his name
to dwell in this house, that thou alter not any thing of what we have spoken unto
thee.”-Delitzsch on the Hebrews, Appendix.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:4 He shall put on the holy linen coat, and he shall have the
linen breeches upon his flesh, and shall be girded with a linen girdle, and with the
linen mitre shall he be attired: these [are] holy garments; therefore shall he wash his
flesh in water, and [so] put them on.
Ver. 4. Therefore shall he wash.] As we must be always holy, so then most when we
present ourselves to the holy eyes of our Creator. We wash our hands every day; but
when we are to sit with some great person, we scour them with balls. See Leviticus
16:24.
52

53. PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:4
His special garments for the occasion are the holy linen coat,… the linen breeches,…
a linen girdle,… and the linen mitre. In the original the definite article is not
expressed. The reading should therefore be, He shall put on a holy linen coat, and he
shall have linen breeches upon his flesh, and shall be girded with a linen girdle, and
with a linen mitre shall be attired. The clothing was white from head to foot,
differing therein from the dress of the ordinary priest, inasmuch as the sash or
girdle of the latter was of variegated materials, and differing also in the shape of the
mitre. The white clothing was not intended to symbolize humility and penitence, as
some have thought, for white is not the colour in which penitents are naturally
dressed. Rather it was symbolical of the purity and holiness which the ceremonies of
the day symbolically affected, and which was specially needed to be exhibited in the
person of the high priest. In the visions of Ezekiel and Daniel, the angel of God is
clothed in linen (Ezekiel 9:2, Ezekiel 9:3, Ezekiel 9:11; Ezekiel 10:2, Ezekiel 10:6,
Ezekiel 10:7; Daniel 10:5; Daniel 12:6, Daniel 12:7). And the colour of the angelic
raiment is described in the Gospels as white: "his countenance was like lightning,
and his raiment white as snow" (Matthew 28:3); "they saw a young man sitting on
the right side, clothed in a long white garment" (Mark 16:5); "two men stood by
them in shining garments" (Luke 24:4); she "seeth two angels in white sitting"
(John 20:12). So, too, the wife of the Lamb, in tile Book of the Revelation, has it
"granted to her that she should be arrayed in fine linen clean and white: for the fine
linen is the righteousness of saints" (Revelation 19:7, Revelation 19:8). The white
linen dress of the high priest, therefore (which must have given the appearance of
the English surplice tied in at the waist), was intended to symbolize the purity and
brightness which forms the characteristic of angels and saints, and, above all, of the
King of saints. "The white material of the dress which Aaron wore when
performing the highest act of expiation under the Old Testament was a symbolical
shadowing forth of the holiness and glory of the one perfect Mediator between God
and man, who, being the radiation of the glory of God and the image of his nature,
effected by himself the perfect cleansing away of our sin, and who, as the true High
Priest, being holy, innocent, unspotted, and separate from sinners, entered once by
his own blood into the holy place not made with hands, namely, into heaven itself, to
appear before the face of God for us and obtain everlasting redemption (Hebrews
1:3; Hebrews 7:26; Hebrews 9:12, Hebrews 9:24)" (Keil). The symbolism of the holy
garments as indicating holiness and purity, is strengthened by the command that
Aaron is to wash his flesh in water, and so put them on.
The high priest's acts on this day, so far as they are recounted in this chapter, were
the following.
1. He bathed.
2. He dressed himself in his white holy garments.
3. He offered or presented at the door of the tabernacle a bullock for a sin offering
53

54. for himself and his house.
4. He presented at the same place two goats for a sin offering for the congregation.
5. He cast lots on the two goats, one of which was to be sacrificed, the other to he let
go into the wilderness.
6. He sacrificed the bullock.
7. He passed from the court through the holy place into the holy of holies with a
censer and incense, and filled the space beyond the vail with a cloud of smoke from
the incense.
8. He returned to the court, and, taking some of the blood of the bullock, passed
again within the vail, and there sprinkled the blood once on the front of the mercy-
seat and seven times before it.
9. He came out again into the court, and killed the goat on which the lot for sacrifice
had fallen.
10. For the third time he entered the holy of holies, and went through the same
process with the goat's blood as with the bullock's blood.
11. He purified the other part of the tabernacle, as he had purified the holy of holies,
by sprinkling with the atoning blood, as before, and placing some of it on the horns
of the altar of incense (Exodus 30:10).
12. He returned to the court, and placed the blood of the bullock and goat upon the
horns of the altar of burnt sacrifice, and sprinkled it seven times.
13. He offered to God the remaining goat, laying his hands upon it, confessing and
laying the sins of the people upon its head.
14. He consigned the goat to a man, whose business it was to conduct it to the border
of the wilderness, and there release it.
15. He bathed and changed his linen vestments for his commonly worn high priest's
dress.
16. He sacrificed, one after the other, the two rams as burnt offerings for himself
and for the people.
17. He burnt the fat of the sin offerings upon the altar.
18. He took measures that the remainder of the sin offerings should be burnt
without the camp.
54

55. In Numbers 29:7-11, twelve sacrifices are commanded to be offered by the high
priest on this day, namely, the morning and evening sacrifice; a burnt offering for
the people, consisting of one young bullock, one ram (as already stated), and seven
lambs; and cue goat for a sin offering; so that in all there were fifteen sacrifices
offered, besides the meat and drink offerings. The punctiliousness of the Jews in
later times was not content that the ceremonies should begin on the day itself.
Preparations commenced a full week previously. On the third day of the seventh
month, the high priest moved from his house in the city into the temple, and he was
twice sprinkled with the ashes of the red heifer, by way of precaution against
defilement. He spent the week in practicing and rehearsing, under the eye of some of
the elders of the Sanhedrim, the various acts that he would have to perform on the
great day, and on the night immediately preceding it he was not allowed to sleep. In
case of his sudden death or disqualification, a substitute was appointed to fulfill his
function.
5 From the Israelite community he is to take two
male goats for a sin offering and a ram for a
burnt offering.
BARNES, "Take of the congregation - i. e. they were to be supplied at the public
cost.
Two kids of the goats - This should be, two shaggy he-goats (Lev_4:23 note), of the
same color, size, and value.
GILL, "And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel,.... With
whom only the high priest had to do on the day of atonement; as Christ our high priest
has only with the Israel of God, the elect, given him by the Father, for whom he offered
up himself, and for whose sins he made reconciliation:
two kids of the goats for a sin offering; the one of which was killed, and the other
let go alive, and both were but one offering, typical of Christ in both his natures, divine
and human, united in one person; and who was made sin, and became a sin offering for
his people:
and one ram for a burnt offering; a type of Christ, mighty to save, this creature
55

56. being a strong one; and of his dolorous sufferings, this offering being burnt; and of God's
gracious acceptance of his sacrifice, which was of a sweet smelling savour to him; the
burnt offering following by way of thanksgiving for atonement made by the sin offering
graciously accepted by the Lord.
HENRY 5-14, "The Jewish writers say that for seven days before the day of expiation
the high priest was to retire from his own house, and to dwell in a chamber of the
temple, that he might prepare himself for the service of this great day. During those
seven days he himself did the work of the inferior priests about the sacrifices, incense,
etc., that he might have his hand in for this day: he must have the institution read to him
again and again, that he might be fully apprised of the whole method. 1. He was to begin
the service of the day very early with the usual morning sacrifice, after he had first
washed his whole body before he dressed himself, and his hands and feet again
afterwards. He then burned the daily incense, dressed the lamps, and offered the
extraordinary sacrifice appointed for this day (not here, but Num_29:8), a bullock, a
ram, and seven lambs, all for burnt-offerings. This he is supposed to have done in his
high priest's garments. 2. He must now put off his rich robes, bathe himself, put on the
linen garments, and present unto the Lord his own bullock, which was to be a sin-
offering for himself and his own house, Lev_16:6. The bullock was set between the
temple and the altar, and the offering of him mentioned in this verse was the making of a
solemn confession of his sins and the sins of his house, earnestly praying for the
forgiveness of them, and this with his hands on the head of the bullock. 3. He must then
cast lots upon the two goats, which were to make (both together) one sin-offering for the
congregation. One of these goats must be slain, in token of a satisfaction to be made to
God's justice for sin, the other must be sent away, in token of the remission or
dismission of sin by the mercy of God. Both must be presented together to God (Lev_
16:7) before the lot was cast upon them, and afterwards the scape-goat by itself, Lev_
16:10. Some think that goats were chosen for the sin-offering because, by the
disagreeableness of their smell, the offensiveness of sin is represented: others think,
because it was said that the demons which the heathens then worshipped often appeared
to their worshippers in the form of goats, God therefore obliged his people to sacrifice
goats, that they might never be tempted to sacrifice to goats. 4. The next thing to be done
was to kill the bullock for the sin-offering for himself and his house, Lev_16:11. “Now,”
say the Jews, “he must again put his hands on the head of the bullock, and repeat the
confession and supplication he had before made, and kill the bullock with his own
hands, to make atonement for himself first (for how could he make reconciliation for the
sins of the people till he was himself first reconciled?) and for his house, not only his
own family, but all the priests, who are called the house of Aaron,” Psa_135:19. This
charity must begin at home, though it must not end there. The bullock being killed, he
left one of the priests to stir the blood, that it might not thicken, and then, 5. He took a
censer of burning coals (that would not smoke) in one hand, and a dish full of the sweet
incense in the other, and then went into the holy of holies through the veil, and went up
towards the ark, set the coals down upon the floor, and scattered the incense upon them,
so that the room was immediately filled with smoke. The Jews say that he was to go in
side-ways, that he might not look directly upon the ark where the divine glory was, till it
was covered with smoke; then he must come out backwards, out of reverence to the
divine majesty; and, after a short prayer, he was to hasten out of the sanctuary, to show
himself to the people, that they might not suspect that he had misbehaved himself and
died before the Lord. 6. He then fetched the blood of the bullock from the priest whom
56

57. he had left stirring it, and took that in with him the second time into the holy of holies,
which was now filled with the smoke of the incense, and sprinkled with his finger of that
blood upon, or rather towards, the mercy-seat, once over against the top of it and then
seven times towards the lower part of it, Lev_16:14. But the drops of blood (as the Jews
expound it) all fell upon the ground, and none touched the mercy-seat. Having done this,
he came out of the most holy place, set the basin of blood down in the sanctuary, and
went out.
JAMISON 5-10, "shall take of the congregation ... two kids of the goats ...
and one ram — The sacrifices were to be offered by the high priest, respectively for
himself and the other priests, as well as for the people. The bullock (Lev_16:3) and the
goats were for sin offerings and the rams for burnt offerings. The goats, though used in
different ways, constituted only one offering. They were both presented before the Lord,
and the disposal of them determined by lot, which Jewish writers have thus described:
The priest, placing one of the goats on his right hand and the other on his left, took his
station by the altar, and cast into an urn two pieces of gold exactly similar, inscribed, the
one with the words “for the Lord,” and the other for “Azazel” (the scapegoat). After
having well shaken them together, he put both his hands into the box and took up a lot
in each: that in his right hand he put on the head of the goat which stood on his right,
and that in his left he dropped on the other. In this manner the fate of each was decided.
ELLICOTT, " (5) And he shall take of the congregation.—On this occasion the high
priest himself had to officiate, by virtue of his being the chief mediator between God
and His people.
Two kids of the goats.—Better, two shaggy he-goats. (See Leviticus 4:23.) These two
goats, which were the sin offering for the people, and the ram, which was their
burnt offering, were purchased with the money of the public some time before the
Day of Atonement. During the second Temple the two goats had to be alike in value,
equal in size, and of the same colour. If one of them happened to die after the
decision of the lot, a new pair had to be purchased, and the surviving one of the
original pair was kept and properly fed till it became ritually defective, whereupon
it was sold, and the money paid into the sacred treasury.
PETT, "Verse 5
“And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel two he-goats for a
purification for sin offering, and one ram for a whole burnt offering.”
For the congregation of the children of Israel, the whole people, he was to take two
he-goats and a ram. The two he-goats were ‘for a purification for sin offering’. As
we shall see shortly the two were seen as one. The ram was for a whole burnt
offering.
They were types and shadows of the great He-Goat and Ram, the Lamb of God,
57

58. Who would offer up Himself once-for-all that He might offer Himself without spot
to God, purging our consciences from dead works to serve the living God (Hebrews
9:14) and perfecting for ever those whom He sanctified (Hebrews 10:14).
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:5 And he shall take of the congregation of the children of
Israel two kids of the goats for a sin offering, and one ram for a burnt offering.
Ver. 5. Two kids of the goats.] Both of them types of Christ: who though he died not
for wicked goats, yet he seemed rejected of God, and was reckoned among
malefactors. [Isaiah 53:9]
PULPIT, "And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of
the goats. It was necessary that the sacrifice offered for a person or class of persons
should be provided by the offerer or offerers. The two kids of the goats, or rather
the two he-goats, constituted together but one sin offering. This is important for the
understanding of the sequel.
6 “Aaron is to offer the bull for his own sin
offering to make atonement for himself and his
household.
BARNES, "Shall offer - Rather, shall present, as in Lev_16:7, Lev_16:10, etc. The
word expresses the formal act of placing the victims in front of the entrance of the
tabernacle.
For himself, and for his house - i. e. for himself as the high priest and all the
common priests. Compare Lev_9:7-14 note.
GILL, "And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin offering, which is for
himself,.... That is, bring it into the court, and present it before the Lord in order to its
being slain and sacrificed; for as yet it was not killed, and so could not be offered on the
altar, see Lev_16:11; the place where the bullock was set was between the porch and the
altar, his head in the south, and his face to the west, and the priest stood in the east, and
his face to the west, and laid both his hands upon him, and confessed his sins, and his
family's (x): and this is said to be "for himself"; not to atone for him, which is afterwards
expressed, but which should come of him or from him, and not from the congregation,
as Jarchi explains it; or as the Targum of Jonathan more clearly, which is of his own
money, wholly at his own expense, and not the people's:
and make atonement for himself, and for his house; for himself, for his own
personal sins and for his family's sins, those of his wife and children; and it may be
58

59. extended to all the priests of the house of Aaron; and some say to the Levites also, as
Aben Ezra notes, though he disapproves of it: by this it appears, that Christ, the antitype
of Aaron, is a more perfect and excellent priest than he, who needed not to offer up
sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for his people's, for this he did once, when he
offered up himself, Heb_7:27; and which was for his whole family, and them only, the
elect of God, consisting of Jews and Gentiles; part of which is in heaven, and part on
earth, and both were reconciled, or atonement made for them, by the blood of Christ;
whose house and family men appear to be, when they believe and hope in him, and hold
fast their faith and hope; and who are made by him priests as well as kings to God; see
Eph_3:15 Rev_1:6.
K&D 6-10, "With the bullock Aaron was to make atonement for himself and his
house. The two he-goats he was to place before Jehovah (see Lev_1:5), and “give lots
over them,” i.e., have lots cast upon them, one lot for Jehovah, the other for Azazel. The
one upon which the lot for Jehovah fell (‫ה‬ָ‫ל‬ָ‫,ע‬ from the coming up of the lot out of the
urn, Jos_18:11; Jos_19:10), he was to prepare as a sin-offering for Jehovah, and to
present the one upon which the lot for Azazel fell alive before Jehovah, ‫יו‬ָ‫ל‬ָ‫ע‬ ‫ר‬ֵ‫פּ‬ ַ‫כ‬ ְ‫,ל‬ “to
expiate it,” i.e., to make it the object of expiation (see at Lev_16:21), to send it (them)
into the desert to Azazel. ‫ֵל‬‫ז‬‫ָא‬‫ז‬ֲ‫ע‬, which only occurs in this chapter, signifies neither “a
remote solitude,” nor any locality in the desert whatever (as Jonathan, Rashi, etc.,
suppose); nor the “he-goat” (from ‫ז‬ֵ‫ע‬ goat, and ‫ַל‬‫ז‬ָ‫ע‬ to turn off, “the goat departing or
sent away,” as Symm., Theodot., the Vulgate, Luther, and others render it); nor
“complete removal” (Bähr, Winer, Tholuck, etc.). The words, one lot for Jehovah and
one for Azazel, require unconditionally that Azazel should be regarded as a personal
being, in opposition to Jehovah. The word is a more intense form of ‫ַל‬‫ז‬ָ‫ע‬ removit,
dimovit, and comes from ‫ֵל‬‫ז‬ ְ‫ַל‬‫ז‬ֲ‫ע‬ by absorbing the liquid, like Babel from balbel (Gen_
11:9), and Golgotha from gulgalta (Ewald, §158c). The Septuagint rendering is correct,
ὁ ἀποπομπαῖος; although in Lev_16:10 the rendering ἀποπομπή is also adopted, i.e.,
“averruncus, a fiend, or demon whom one drives away” (Ewald). We have not to think,
however, of any demon whatever, who seduces men to wickedness in the form of an evil
spirit, as the fallen angel Azazel is represented as doing in the Jewish writings (Book of
Enoch 8:1; 10:10; 13:1ff.), like the terrible field Shibe, whom the Arabs of the peninsula
of Sinai so much dread (Seetzen, i. pp. 273-4), but of the devil himself, the head of the
fallen angels, who was afterwards called Satan; for no subordinate evil spirit could have
been placed in antithesis to Jehovah as Azazel is here, but only the ruler or head of the
kingdom of demons. The desert and desolate places are mentioned elsewhere as the
abode of evil spirits (Isa_13:21; Isa_34:14; Mat_12:43; Luk_11:24; Rev_18:2). The
desert, regarded as an image of death and desolation, corresponds to the nature of evil
spirits, who fell away from the primary source of life, and in their hostility to God
devastated the world, which was created good, and brought death and destruction in
their train.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 6
(6) And Aaron shall offer.—Better, And Aaron shall present, or bring near, as the
word literally denotes (comp, Leviticus 16:9; Leviticus 16:11, &c.), since the actual
offering or killing took place afterwards, when the lots for the goats had been cast,
59

60. as described in Leviticus 16:11.
For himself, and for his house.—By this is meant that the atonement was for his own
sins, for those of his family and for all the priests, the sons of Aaron. The ritual at
this pontifical sacrifice during the second Temple was most solemn and impressive.
By the side of the victim, which was placed between the porch and the altar towards
the east, stood the high priest, arrayed in his white robes, with his face towards the
west. In this attitude of a penitent sinner, the pontiff laid both his hands upon the
sacrifice and confessed his sins in an audible voice in the sight of God and the
assembled congregation as follows: “O Lord, I have sinned, I have committed
iniquity, I have transgressed before thee, I and my house. O Lord, I beseech thee
cover over my sins, iniquities, and transgressions which I have committed before
thee, I and my house, even as it is written in the Law of Moses thy servant—For on
that day He will cover over for you and cleanse you from all your sins,” &c. To this
the congregation replied: “Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom for ever
and ever.” Whereupon the high priest repeated this confession a second time,
including in it the children of Aaron, God’s holy people. (See Leviticus 16:11.)
PETT, "Verse 6
“And Aaron shall present the bull ox of the purification for sin offering, which is for
himself, and make atonement for himself, and for his house.”
First of all Aaron has to make atonement for himself and for his house by offering
the bull ox for a purification for sin offering. At this stage, however, he merely
‘presents’ it, although it is pointed out that its final purpose is that it might make
atonement.
WHEDON, " 6. Shall offer — R.V., “present.” The actual offering does not take
place until Leviticus 16:11.
An atonement for himself — “An innocent man,” says Van der Waegen, “must come
and make atonement for the guilty; but the guilty may not come and make
atonement for the innocent.” Since innocence is not inherent in fallen man by nature
or practice, only as one who had himself been atoned could the high priest make
atonement for others. “Every reconciling and sanctifying effect of the sacrifices is
dependent on the existence of a personally reconciling mediatorship before God;
and here the old covenant proclaims its inadequacy to institute a real reconciliation,
in the fact that even the high priest himself, through whose intercessions the defect
which attaches to the offering is made good, himself in turn has need of
reconciliation and purification, as one subject to sin and weakness.” Comp.
Hebrews 5:3. — Oehler. Here the Antitype, Jesus, differs from his types. His
priesthood was unique in its sinlessness, and his piety unique in its impenitence.
When God acknowledges a high priest as well-pleasing in his sight, this is a real
declaration that he graciously accepts the whole people. On the contrary, his error is
60

61. the inculpation of the people. Leviticus 4:3, note. That this required atonement is for
involuntary defects and inadvertencies arising from fallen nature, rather than for
special cases of transgression, is evident not only from the provision made for the
latter in Leviticus 4:3-12, but also from the presumption of sinfulness referred to in
Leviticus 16:3, note. Aaron’s confession of sin was in these words: “O, for Jehovah’s
sake, do Thou expiate the misdeeds, the crimes, and the sins wherewith I have done
evil, and have sinned before thee, I and my house, as is written in the law of Moses
thy servant,” concluding with quoting Leviticus 16:30. — Delitzsch on the Hebrews,
Appendix.
And for his house — Hence only a married high priest was permitted to officiate on
the day of atonement.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:6 And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin offering, which
[is] for himself, and make an atonement for himself, and for his house.
Ver. 6. And for his house.] Whereof a minister must be mainly careful, [1 Timothy
3:4] lest, as Augustus doing justice on others, he be hit in the teeth with his own
disordered family. Aaron had lately smarted in his two eldest.
PULPIT, "And Aaron shall offer his bullock … and make an atonement for himself,
and for his house. The first step is an expiatory offering to reconcile the officiating
priest and the remainder of the priestly house to God. This was necessary before his
offerings for the people could be accepted. It indicates the defects inherent in a
priest whose nature was only that of man, which is compassed about with
infirmities. The offering here commanded is not the slaying, but the solemn
presentation, of the bullock to the Lord. In after times the following form of
confession was used by the high priest when he laid his hand upon the bullock:—"O
Lord, I have committed iniquity; I have transgressed; I have sinned, I and my
house. O Lord, I entreat thee, cover over the iniquities, the transgressions, and the
sins which I have committed, transgressed, and sinned before thee, I and my house;
even as it is written in the Law of Moses thy servant, 'For on that day will he cover
over for you, to make you clean; from all your transgressions before the Lord ye
shall be cleansed" (Edersheim, 'Temple Service').
7 Then he is to take the two goats and present
them before the Lord at the entrance to the tent of
meeting.
61

62. CLARKE, "And he shall take the two goats - It is allowed on all hands that this
ceremony, taken in all its parts, pointed out the Lord Jesus dying for our sins and rising
again for our justification; being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit.
Two goats are brought, one to be slain as a sacrifice for sin, the other to have the
transgressions of the people confessed over his head, and then to be sent away into the
wilderness. The animal by this act was represented as bearing away or carrying off the
sins of the people. The two goats made only one sacrifice, yet only one of them was slain.
One animal could not point out both the Divine and human nature of Christ, nor show
both his death and resurrection, for the goat that was killed could not be made alive. The
Divine and human natures in Christ were essential to the grand expiation: yet the human
nature alone suffered, for the Divine nature could not suffer; but its presence in the
human nature, while agonizing unto death, stamped those agonies, and the consequent
death, with infinite merit. The goat therefore that was slain prefigured his human nature
and its death; the goat that escaped pointed out his resurrection. The one shows the
atonement for sin, as the ground of justification; the other Christ’s victory, and the total
removal of sin in the sanctification of the soul. Concerning these ceremonies we shall see
farther particulars as we proceed. According to Maimonides fifteen beasts were offered
on this day. “The daily, or morning and evening sacrifice, was offered as usual: besides a
bullock, a ram, and seven lambs, all burnt-offerings; and a goat for a sin-offering, which
was eaten in the evening. Then a bullock for a sin-offering, and this they burnt; and a
ram for a burnt-offering: these both for the high priest. Then the ram for the
consecration, (see Lev_16:5) which is called the people’s ram. They brought also for the
congregation two he-goats; the one for a sin-offering, the other for a scape-goat. Thus all
the beasts offered on this great solemn day were Fifteen: the two daily sacrifices, one
bullock, two rams, and seven lambs: all of these burnt-offerings. Two goats for sin-
offerings; one offered without and eaten on the evening, the other offered within and
burnt; and one bullock for a sin-offering for the high priest. The service of all these
fifteen beasts is performed on this day by the high priest only.” See Maimonides and
Ainsworth on the place.
GILL, "And he shall take the two goats,.... The sin offering for the people, a proper
emblem of Christ, this creature being clean and fit for food, denoting the purity of
Christ, and his being suitable and wholesome food, as his flesh is to the faith of his
people; and because comely in its going, as Christ was in his going from everlasting, and
in his coming, into this world, travelling in the greatness of his strength; and even by
reason of its having something in it unsavoury and offensive, and which made it the
fitter emblem of Christ, as a surety of his people; for though he had no sin inherent in
him and natural to him, yet he appeared in the likeness of sinful flesh, and had sin
imputed to him, which rendered him obnoxious to divine justice: the number of these
goats was two, typical either of the two natures in Christ; his divine nature, in which he
is impassable, and lives for ever, which may be signified by the goat presented alive and
let go; and his human nature, in which he suffered and died, and may be fitly
represented by the goat that was slain; or else of the two estates of Christ before and
after his resurrection, his being put to death in the flesh and quickened in the Spirit; or
rather this may signify the twofold consideration of Christ as Mediator, one with respect
62

63. to his divine Father, to whom he made satisfaction by his death; and the other with
respect to Satan, with whom he conflicted in life, and to whose power he was so far
delivered up, as not only to be tempted, and harassed by him, but through his instigation
to be brought to the dust of death; See Gill on Lev_16:10; and these two goats, according
to the Jewish writers (y), were to be alike in sight or colour, in stature and in value, and
to be taken together: Christ, the antitype of them, is the same dying and rising; the same
that died, rose again from the dead; the same that suffered, is glorified; and the same
that went up to heaven, will come again in like manner:
and present them before the Lord, at the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation; at the east of the court, and the north of the altar, as the Misnah (z); so
that their faces were towards the west, where the holy of holies, the seat of the divine
Majesty, was, and so said to be before the Lord, or over against where he dwelt: this
presentation may have respect to the death of Christ, when he presented himself to God
as an offering and a sacrifice; and which was done publicly in the sight of great
multitudes, and on the behalf of the whole congregation of the Lord's people, and before
him against whom sin is committed, and to whom satisfaction is given.
CALVIN, "7.And he shall take the two goats. A twofold mode of expiation is here
presented to us; for one of the two goats was offered in sacrifice according to the
provisions of the Law, the other was sent away to be an outcast, or offscouring
( κάθαρμα vel περίψημα (242)) The fulfillment of both figures, however, was
manifested in Christ, since He was both the Lamb of God, whose offering blotted
out the sins of the world, and, that He might be as an offscouring, ( κάθαρμα ,) His
comeliness was destroyed, and He was rejected of men. A more subtle speculation
might indeed be advanced, viz., that after the goat was presented, its sending away
was a type of the resurrection of Christ; as if the slaying of the one goat testified that
the satisfaction for sins was to be sought in the death of Christ; whilst the
preservation and dismissal of the other shewed, that after Christ had been offered
for sin, and had borne the curse of men, He still remained alive. I embrace, however,
what is more simple and certain, and am satisfied with that; i.e., that the goat which
departed alive and free, was an atonement, (243) that by its departure and flight the
people might be assured that their sins were put away and vanished. This was the
only expiatory sacrifice in the Law without blood; nor does this contradict the
statement of the Apostle, for since two goats were offered together, it was enough
that the death of one should take place, and that its blood should be shed for
expiation; for the lot was not cast until both goats had been brought to the door of
the tabernacle; and thus although the priest presented one of them alive “to make
an atonement with him,” as Moses expressly says, yet God was not propitiated
without blood, since the efficacy of the expiation depended on the sacrifice of the
other goat. As to the word Azazel, (244) although commentators differ, I doubt not
but that it designates the place to which the scape-goat was driven. It is certainly a
compound word, equivalent to “the departure of the goat,” which the Greeks have
translated, whether properly or not I cannot say, ἀποπομπαῖον I am afraid that the
expiation is decidedly too subtle which some interpreters give, that the goat was so
called as “the repeller of evils,” just as the Gentiles (245) invented certain gods,
called ἀλεξικάκους. What I have said agrees best with the departure of the goat;
63

64. although I differ from the Jews, who conceive that this place was contiguous to
Mount Sinai; as if the lot for Azazel were not cast every year, when the people were
very far away from Mount Sinai. Let it suffice, then, that some solitary and most
uninhabitable spot was chosen whither the goat should be driven, lest the curse of
God should rest upon the people.
Δῶρον ἀλεξικάκοιο Διὸς — Orph. Λίθικα, i.
and Lactantius says, that an image of Apollonius was worshipped at Ephesus, “sub
Herculis Alexieaci nomine constitutum.” — De Just. v. 3.
COKE, "Verse 7-8
Leviticus 16:7-8. He shall take the two goats— The two goats made but one offering,
and are so spoken of in the 5th verse, two kids of the goats for a sin-offering; in
token of which, they were both to be presented before the Lord; when lots were to
be cast upon them, Leviticus 16:8 which was done in the following manner: the
priest, placing the two goats, the one on his right hand, the other on his left, stood by
the altar, and casting into an urn or box two lots of wood or metal, upon one of
which were written the words for Jehovah, and on the other for Azazel: he then
shook the urn, and putting in both his hands, took up a lot in each, and let fall the
right hand lot upon the goat which stood on his right hand, and the left hand lot
upon the other; by which the fate of each was determined according to the following
verses.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 7
(7) And he shall take the two goats.—Having presented his own sin-offering, the
high priest, accompanied by the two chief priests, now came to the north of the
altar. Here the one of his companions who was next in rank to the pontiff placed
himself at his right side, whilst the other, who held the office of chief of the principal
household (see 1 Chronicles 24:6), stood at his left. It was here that the two goats
were presented with their faces to the west, where the Holy of Holies was, and where
the Divine majesty was especially revealed.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:7. He shall present them before the Lord — The scape-goat
was presented at the door of the tabernacle before the Lord, as well as the other
goat, to signify that they were both consecrated to him; indeed they both made but
one sin-offering, Leviticus 16:5.
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:7, Leviticus 16:8
It must be carefully noted that. as the two goats made one sin offering (Leviticus
16:5), so they are both presented before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation. By this solemn presentation they became the Lord's, one as much as
the other. After this, Aaron is to cast lots upon the two goats. The two goats, of the
64

65. same size and appearance as far as possible, stood together near the entrance of the
court. And by them was an urn containing two lots. These the high priest drew out
at the same moment, placing one on the head of one goat, the other on the head of
the other goat. According as the lot fell. one of the goats was taken and at once
offered to the Lord, with a view to being shortly sacrificed; the other was appointed
for a scapegoat, and reserved till the expiatory sacrifices had been made, when it too
was offered to the Lord, and then sent away into the wilderness. After the lot had
been chosen, the two goats were distinguished from each other by having a piece of
scarlet cloth tied, the first round its neck, the second round its horn. One lot for the
Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat. The last word is in the original la-azāzel,
and being found only in this chapter, it has caused a great discrepancy of opinion
among interpreters as to its meaning. It has been diversely regarded as a place, a
person, a thing, and an abstraction. The first class of interpreters explain it as some
district of the wilderness; the second understand by it an evil spirit; the third take it
as a designation of the goat; the fourth translate it, "for removal." The first
interpretation may be summarily rejected. If a localized spot were meant, that spot
would have been left behind by a people constantly on the move. The second
hypothesis—that azāzel was an evil spirit, or the evil spirit—has been embraced by
so considerable a number of modern expositors, that it is necessary to dwell upon it
at some length. But, indeed, it has little to recommend it. It has been argued that
azāzel must be a proper name, because it has no article prefixed to it, la-azāzel. This
is a grammatical error. When a noun expresses an office or a function, and has the
preposition le or la prefixed to it, it does not take an article in Hebrew any more
than in French; e.g; in the verse, "Jehu … shalt thou anoint to be king (or for king)
over Israel; and Elisha … shalt thou appoint to be prophet (or for prophet) in thy
room" (1 Kings 19:16), the Hebrew is le-melek and le-navi, without the article. The
same idiom will be found in 1 Samuel 25:30; 2 Samuel 7:14. With greater
plausibility it is argued that 2 Samuel 7:8 contrasts Jehovah and Azazel, and that if
la-Yehovah be translated "for Jehovah," or "for the Lord," la-azāzel must be
translated "for Azazel." It may be allowed that there is a prima facie likelihood
that, where words are thus contrasted, if one designates a person, the other would
designate a person. But it is an incredibly rash assertion that this is always the case.
All depends upon the idea which the speaker or writer has in his mind and desires
to express. As part of the same argument, it is urged that the preposition, being the
same in both clauses of the sentence, must be translated by the same word. This is
certainly not the case. The natural meaning of le with a proper name is "for," and
with a word expressing the performance of some function (technically called nomen
agentis) it means "to be" (see the passage quoted above from 1 Kings 19:16). Unless,
therefore, azāzel be a proper name (which has to be proved, not assumed)the
preposition need not and ought not to be translated by "for" but by "to be." The
word le is used with great latitude, and often in a different sense in the same
sentence; e.g; Exodus 12:24; Le Exodus 26:12. The objections to the theory that
azāzel means an evil spirit are of overwhelming force. It will be enough to name the
following.
1. The name azāzel is nowhere else mentioned. This could not be, if he were so
65

66. important a being as to divide with Jehovah the sin offering of the congregation of
Israel on the great Day of Atonement.
2. No suitable etymology can be discerned. The nearest approach to it is very
forced—"the separated one."
3. The notion of appeasing, or bribing, or mocking the evil spirit by presenting to
him a goat, is altogether alien from the spirit of the rest of the Mosaic institutions.
Where else is there anything like it?
4. The goat is presented and offered to Jehovah equally with the goat which is slain.
To take that which has been offered (and therefore half sacrificed) to God and give
it to Satan, would be a daring impiety, which is inconceivable. That la-azāzel means
"for removal" is the opinion of Bahr, Tholuck, Winer, and others. There is nothing
objectionable in this interpretation, but the form of the word azāzel points rather to
an agent than to an abstract act. Azāzel is a word softened (according to a not
unusual custom) from azalzel, just as kokav is a softened form of kav-kav, and as
Babel is derived from Balbel (Genesis 11:9). Azalzel is an active participle or
participial noun, derived ultimately from azal (connected with the Arabic word
azala, and meaning removed), but immediately from the reduplicate form of that
verb, azazal. The reduplication of the consonants of the root in Hebrew and Arabic
gives the force of repetition, so that while azal means removed, azalzal means
removed by a repetition of acts. Azalzel, or azāzel, therefore, means one who
removes by a series of acts. "In this sense the word azāzel is strictly expressive of the
function which is ascribed to the scapegoat in Exodus 26:21, Exodus 26:22; namely,
that he 'be sent away, bearing upon him all the iniquities of the children of Israel
into the wilderness.' It properly denotes one that removes or separates; yet a
remover in such sort that the removal is not effected by a single act or at one
moment, but by a series of minor acts tending to and issuing in a complete removal.
No word could better express the movement of the goat before the eyes of the people,
as it passed on, removing at each step, in a visible symbol, their sins further and
further from them, until, by continued repetition of the movement, they were
carried far away and removed utterly". That it is the goat that is designated by the
word azāzel is the exposition of the LXX; Josephus, Symmachus, Aquila,
Theodotion, the Vulgate, the Authorized English Version, and Luther's Version.
The interpretation is founded on sound etymological grounds, it suits the context
wherever the word occurs, it is consistent with the remaining ceremonial of the Day
of Atonement, and it accords with the otherwise known religious beliefs and
symbolical practices of the Israelites. The two goats were the single sin offering for
the people; the one that was offered in sacrifice symbolized atonement or covering
made by shedding of blood, the other symbolized the utter removal of the sins of the
people, which were conveyed away and lost in the depths of the wilderness, whence
there was no return. Cf. Psalms 103:12, "As far as the east is from the west, so far
hath he removed our transgressions from us;" and Micah 7:19, "He will turn again,
he will have compassion upon us; he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast
66

67. all their sins into the depths of the sea." The eighth verse should be translated as it
stands in the Authorized Version, or, if we ask for still greater exactness, And Aaron
shall east lots upon the two goats; one lot for the Lord, and one lot for a remover of
sins.
8 He is to cast lots for the two goats—one lot for
the Lord and the other for the scapegoat.[b]
BARNES, "The two goats formed a single sin-offering, Lev_16:5. To bring out the
meaning of the sacrifice it was necessary that the act of a living being should be
performed after death. See Lev_16:22 note. As this could not possibly be visibly set forth
with a single victim, two were employed, as in the case of the birds in the rite for the
healed leper Lev_14:4-6.
For the scapegoat - Rather, for Azazel. The word occurs nowhere else in the Old
Testament but in this chapter, and is probably derived from a root in use in Arabic, but
not in Hebrew, signifying to “remove”, or “to separate”.
Azazel is the pre-Mosaic name of an evil personal being placed in opposition to
Yahweh. Each goat, having been presented to Yahweh before the lots were cast, stood in
a sacrificial relation to Him. The casting of lots was an appeal to the decision of Yahweh
(compare Jos_7:16-17; Jos_14:2; Pro_16:33; Act_1:26, etc.); it was therefore His act to
choose one of the goats for His service in the way of ordinary sacrifice, the other for His
service in carrying off the sins to Azazel (see the note at Lev_16:22). By this exppressive
outward sign the sins were sent back to the author of sin himself, “the entirely separate
one,” who was banished from the realm of grace.
The goat itself did not lose the sacred character with which it had been endued in
being presented before Yahweh. It was, as much as the slain goat, a figure of Him who
bore our griefs and carried our sorrows, on whom the Lord laid the iniquity of us all Isa_
53:4, Isa_53:6, that we might become a sanctified Church to be presented unto Himself,
not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing Eph_5:26-27.
CLARKE, "Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats - The Jews inform us that
there were two lots made either of wood, stone, or any kind of metal. On one was written
‫לשם‬ Lashshem, for the Name, i. e., ‫יהוה‬ Jehovah, which the Jews will neither write nor
pronounce: on the other was written ‫לעזאזל‬ Laazazel, for the Scape-Goat: then they put
67

68. the two lots into a vessel which was called ‫קלפי‬ kalpey, the goats standing with their
faces towards the west. Then the priest came, and the goats stood before him, one on the
right hand and the other on the left; the kalpey was then shaken, and the priest put in
both his hands and brought out a lot in each: that which was in his right hand he laid on
the goat that was on his right, and that in his left hand he laid on the goat that was on his
left; and according to what was written on the lots, the scape-goat and the goat for
sacrifice were ascertained. See the Mishna, in Tract. Yoma. The determining this solemn
business by lot, the disposal of which is with the Lord, Pro_16:33, shows that God alone
was to select and point out the person by whom this great atonement was to be made;
hence he says: Behold I lay in Zion a stone, elect (that is, chosen by himself) and
precious - of infinite value.
GILL, "And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats,.... Which should be slain,
and which should be kept alive, and let go: the manner of casting lots, according to the
Misnah (a), was this; the high priest went to the east of the court, to the north of the
altar, the Sagan (or deputy priest) at his right hand, and Rosh Beth Ab (or the chief of
the house of the fathers) on his left hand, and the two goats were there; and there was a
vessel (box or urn, called Calphi), and in it were two lots of box tree: the high priest
shook the Calphi (or urn) and took out the two lots; one, on which was written, "for the
Lord", and the other, on which was written, "for Azazel"; if that came up on the right
hand, the Sagan said to him, my lord high priest, lift up thy right hand on high; and if
that on the left hand came up, Rosh Beth Ab said to him, my lord high priest, lift up thy
left hand on high: he put them upon the two goats and said, a sin offering for the Lord;
and they answered after him, blessed be the Lord, may the glory of his kingdom be for
ever and ever: now these lots, as Ben Gersom observes, were alike, not one greater than
another; and they were of the same matter, for if one had been of stone and the other of
wood, they might, have been known by feeling, and so the lots would not have been
legal: and the same is observed by Maimonides (b), that though they might be of any
matter, of wood, or stone, or metal, yet one might not be great, and the other small, and
the one of silver, and the other of gold, but both alike, for the reason before given:
one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat: one had written upon
it, as in the above account, "for the Lord"; and the other had written upon it, "for
Azazel"; directing that the goat on which the lot for the Lord fell was to be slain and
offered up for a sin offering to him; and the other, on which the lot for Azazel fell, was to
be kept alive and let go: now, however casual and contingent the casting of a lot may
seem to men, it is certain to God, the disposal of it is of him, and according to his
determination, Pro_16:33; and this, in the mystical sense, here denotes, that the
sufferings and death of Christ were according to the determinate counsel and
foreknowledge of God, and so were foretold in the Scriptures, and came to pass
according to his appointment, will, and command, as was also his resurrection from the
dead, Joh_10:18; see Act_1:23; and likewise his conflict with Satan, Joh_14:30.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 8
(8) And Aaron shall cast lots.—The lots consisted of two small tablets which at an
68

69. earlier time were of box or ebony wood, but which during the later part of the
second Temple were made of gold, and were kept in a wooden chest. On the one was
engraved the words “For Jehovah,” and on the other “For Azazel,” the expression
in the original, which is translated scapegoat in the Authorised Version. The high
priest, after shaking the chest, put both his hands into the urn and simultaneously
took out the two tablets, one in each hand. Hereupon he put the tablet which he had
in his right hand upon the goat that was standing on his right side, whilst the tablet
in his left hand he put on the goat on his left side. If the tablet with the in scription
“For Jehovah was in his right hand the chief priest who stood at the right of the
pontiff exclaimed “Hold up thy right hand on high!” and if it happened to be in the
left hand, the chief of the principal household, who stood on his left, called out to
him “Hold up thy left hand.” Hereupon the high priest laid the two lots on the two
goats, the one in the right hand on the goat at his right, and the one in the left hand
on the animal at his left, exclaiming at the same time, “To the Lord a sin offering!”
And the other lot for the scapegoat.—Better, and the other lot for Azazel. The word,
which only occurs in this chapter, probably denotes the utterly banished demon, the
prince of the evil spirits, who with his legions occupies the desert regions and
desolated places. (Comp. Isaiah 13:21; Isaiah 34:14; Matthew 12:43; Luke 11:24;
Revelation 18:2.) As the removal or pardon of sin is often represented in the Bible
by its being banished into the uttermost parts of the earth and seas (Micah 7:19;
Psalms 103:12), nothing could be more striking or convey to the people the idea of
absolute forgiveness better than this symbolical act of sending the goat laden with
the sins of the congregation to the wilderness, the abode of the prince of darkness,
back to the author of all sin. The rendering, scapegoat, is contrary to the manifest
antithesis of the verse. If the one member “For Jehovah” denotes a person, the
second member “For Azazel,” which forms the contrast, must, primâ facie, also
denote a person. Besides, the translation scapegoat cannot be admitted in the next
verse but one, where, if adopted, it would literally be “to send the goat to the
scapegoat in the wilderness” .(see Leviticus 16:10), or in Leviticus 16:26, where it is,
“and he who taketh away the goat to the scapegoat.”
PETT, "Verse 8
“And Aaron shall cast lots on the two goats; one lot for Yahweh, and the other lot
for ‘azazel.”
Then he casts lots for them, selecting between the two, for one is to be for Yahweh,
and one is to be for ‘azazel. The word ‘az’azel is a puzzle to us. Some see it as
meaning ‘the goat of a complete going away’ (from the piel of ’azal - to go away and
‘ez - a goat), thus indicating the complete going away of sin. Others that it means ‘in
order to completely remove’ (compare Arabic ‘azala), thus indicating the complete
removal of sin. Still others consider that it refers to a desolate region, a stark and
deserted place, or a precipice as in later Talmudic tradition (compare Leviticus
16:22), and others see it as representing the name of a demon of the desert named
‘Azazel (a name, however, that is found nowhere else until the much later tradition
69

70. derived from its use here).
This he-goat is somewhat like the living bird in the ritual of cleansing from
suspicious skin disease (Leviticus 14:7; also Leviticus 14:53) which went into ‘the
countryside’, where there was no suggestion of a demon. Thus the indication would
seem to be that the he-goat also is sent away to some far place where it can
disappear for ever, not that it is sent to a demon. However, those disposed to accept
such an interpretation need to recognise that the idea would be that their sins were
sent back to the one responsible for them (one connected with the serpent), not that
an offering is being made to him. This is made clear by the significance of the ritual
and by the fact that it is not slaughtered. But in view of its close link with the other
he-goat with which it is identified as part of a purification for sin offering (Leviticus
16:5) this interpretation just does not fit the bill. The two he-goats were seen as one
combined purification for sin offering, and all of a purification for sin offering goes
to Yahweh in one way or another.
Thus one of the remaining three explanations for the word is more likely. The idea
behind the other three is really the same. The goat and the sins will be gone for ever
from the camp to return no more (see verse 16), as with the living bird. The whole
purpose is that Israel might know that their sins and uncleannesses up to that point
have gone for ever. Many centuries later the tradition would grow that it was taken
to a precipice and thrown off, but that would conflict with the parallel of the freed
bird.
EXPOSITOR'S DICTIONARY, "The Scapegoat
Leviticus 16:8-22
Among a primitive people who seemed to have more moral troubles than any other
and to feel greater need of dismissing them by artificial means, there grew up the
custom of using a curious expedient. They chose a beast of the field, and upon its
head symbolically piled all the moral hard-headedness of the several tribes; after
which the unoffending brute was banished to the wilderness and the guilty
multitude felt relieved. However crude that ancient method of transferring mental
and moral burdens, it had at least this redeeming feature; the early Hebrews heaped
their sins upon a creature which they did not care for and sent it away. In modern
times we pile our burdens upon our dearest fellow-creatures and keep them
permanently near us for further use. What human being but has some other upon
whom he nightly hangs his troubles as he hangs his different garments upon hooks
and nails in the walls around him?
—James Lane Allen in The Mettle of the Pasture, pp161-162.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:8. One lot for the Lord — To be sacrificed to him upon his
altar. Both this and the other goat typified Christ; this in his death and passion for
us, that in his resurrection for our deliverance. The other lot for the scape-goat —
70

71. The Jewish doctors tell us that this goat, on which the sins of the nation were
transferred, was loaded with all marks of reproach, and imprecations, and that the
people prayed that all those evils which they thought due to themselves might fall
upon it. Thus was Christ made a curse for us, while on him was laid the iniquities of
us all.
WHEDON, " 8. Cast lots upon the two goats — The lots were first of boxwood,
afterwards of gold, with an inscription on one “for the Name” — Jehovah was too
sacred to write — and on the other, “for Azazel.” — Delitzsch on the Hebrews,
Appendix. These were put into an urn and shaken, and drawn out with both hands
of the high priest; that in the right hand was laid upon the goat standing at his right,
and that in the left upon its corresponding goat. Divine Providence was supposed to
direct the lots. Proverbs 16:33.
The scapegoat — The ‫,עזאזל‬ Azazel, occurs but four times in this chapter, and
nowhere else in the Holy Scriptures. It is the puzzle of the Book of Leviticus, over
which the most erudite scholars have uttered the despairing groan of “locus
vexatissimus.” Bochart, the chief of Hebraists, notwithstanding his profound
learning, frankly makes the following humiliating confession: “I have nothing
certain to offer in regard to this word;” and Fairbairn admits that “its exact and
determinate import is not to be pronounced on with certainty.” The chief theories
are, 1.) That it is a place, a rough mountain in the vicinity of Mount Sinai: but no
such mountain has ever been found. Besides this, the place is described indefinitely
as any “land not inhabited — the wilderness.” 2.) That it is an appellation of God.
This is sustained by the Syriac version of Azazel — “the mighty God.” The objection
to this view is, that then the lot is a useless formality, since each goat would be
allotted to the Deity, either as Jehovah or as the mighty God. 3.) That the word is a
personal name for Satan or for one of his satellites. This is favoured by the Book of
Enoch, in which Azazel is named as an evil spirit, and by the rabbinical writings,
where it occurs as the appellation of one of four demons. The theory that the sins of
Israel were confessed over the head of the devil, or over an animal devoted to him,
thus making his Satanic majesty co-ordinate with the holy God in the sanctification
of his people, so shocks our sense of propriety that we should dismiss it without
further comment if the names of modern exegetes as celebrated as Bush, Oehler,
Keil, and Ewald, had not given to it the weight of their authority. “The idea that it is
a sacrifice to the devil is at utter variance with the whole Levitical system, not to
speak of the incongruity of a sin offering to that wicked spirit; this is accordingly
generally abandoned. The notion is spun from the interpreter’s own brain, without
anything in the text to suggest it, that sin is hereby sent back to Satan as the source
from which it has proceeded, or the one to whose realm it properly belongs; or that
it is intended as an act of scorn and defiance. This malignant accuser may take these
sins and do his worst with them, he can never bring Israel into condemnation for
offences which have been expiated and forgiven. 4.) The word ‘Azazel’ is derived
from a root meaning ‘to remove;’ and may with greater propriety, as it seems to me,
be regarded as an abstract term, meaning, as the British revisers render it in their
margin, ‘dismissal,’ or, as the American company prefer, as more descriptive of the
71

72. function discharged by the goat, ‘removal.’” — Dr. W. Henry Green. “We must be
very careful in the application of this term. It is one of the terms liable to abuse. The
image has always been accepted as one symbolical of the work of Christ in bearing
away the sins of the world. Considered strictly as a figure, it is full of beauty and
helpful suggestiveness. It has, nevertheless, been open to the most mischievous
perversion.” — Jos. Parker.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:8 And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for
the LORD, and the other lot for the scapegoat.
Ver. 8. Shall cast lots.] To show that nothing was done for us by Christ but what
God’s hand and his counsel determined. [Acts 4:28 1 Peter 1:20] {See Trapp on
"Acts 4:28"} {See Trapp on "1 Peter 1:20"}
For the scape-goat.] Which being a piacular or purging oblation, carried the
people’s curse with it: as did likewise those Obominales among the Grecians; who,
from this custom of the Hebrews, borrowed their yearly expiation of their cities: the
manner whereof, somewhat like unto this. {See Trapp on "1 Corinthians 4:13"}
9 Aaron shall bring the goat whose lot falls to the
Lord and sacrifice it for a sin offering.
GILL, "And Aaron shall bring the goat on which the Lord's lot fell,.... Alluding
to the manner of taking out the lot by the high priest, who, when he took it out, lifted it
up with his hand, and then let it down, and put it on the head of the goat; after which he
brought it to the altar to be sacrificed:
and offer him for a sin offering; an offering for the sins of the people, as a type of
Christ, who made his soul an offering for sin for his people; but this was not done by
Aaron until he had brought and killed the sin offering for himself; after which we read of
killing this sin offering for the people, Lev_16:11; wherefore some take this offering here
to be no other than a setting apart or devoting the goat for this service.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 9
(9) The goat upon which the Lord’s lot fell.—Immediately after the lots decided the
72

73. destiny of the two goats they were distinguished from each other by peculiar marks.
The one which was “for Jehovah had a red woollen thread tied around its neck,
whilst the one “for Azazel” had the scarlet thread tied on the head or on the horns.
And offer him for a sin offering.—Better, and shall present, or appoint it for a sin
offering (see Leviticus 16:6), as the actual offering of it up took place afterwards.
(See Leviticus 16:15.)
PETT, "Verse 9
“And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for Yahweh, and offer him
for a purification for sin offering.”
This is a summary description of what is to happen to the two he-goats, preparing
for the detail which would follow. It is a favourite device in the Pentateuch for
preparing the listener for what is coming and implanting the idea in the mind. Then
as the reading of the narrative goes on the hearer is prepared for the important
points coming. The goat selected for Yahweh is now offered for a purification for sin
offering, but note that the other he-goat is seen as part of that offering (Leviticus
16:5). The two must be seen as part of the one offering, and the way they are dealt
with connected together in one picture. (If the High Priest had been able to take one
he-goat and divide it in two while keeping half alive, that is what he would have
been called on to do).
WHEDON, " 9. Lot fell — Hebrew, came up out of the urn.
Sin offering — All the sins of Israel, without exception, were atoned for this day by
the offering of the two goats on the condition of repentance, even sins not committed
inadvertently, and therefore excluded from atonement by sacrifice on other days of
the year. See Leviticus 4:2, note. The man who had sinned “with a high hand” —
that is, defiantly, with open contempt of Jehovah and his law — was either suddenly
cut off (Numbers 16:30) before the day of atonement or hardened himself beyond
repentance. See chap. iv, including note 3.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:9 And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the LORD’S
lot fell, and offer him [for] a sin offering.
Ver. 9. The goat.] A type of Christ’s mortal humanity, say some, as the scape goat of
his immortal deity: or the one of his death, the other of his resurrection. Others are
of the opinion that hereby was signified that the deity of Christ dwelling in light
inaccessible gave to his humanity sufficient strength for the enduring of those
things, which no other creature could have come near, for the full expiating of our
sins. So he telleth the Jews first, and afterwards his disciples, "Whither I go ye
cannot come." [John 8:22; John 13:36]
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:9, Leviticus 16:10
73

74. These verses might be translated as follows:—And Aaron shall bring in the goat
upon which the lot for the Lord fell, and shall offer him for a sin offering. But the
goat, upon which fell the lot for a remover of sins, shall be presented alive before the
Lord, to make an atonement with him, and to send him away for a remover of sins
into the wilderness. We are justified in inserting the words, "of sins," after "a
remover," because "the use of the word azal, from which the word rendered by
'remover' is derived, is confined in the Hebrew dialect to the single purpose or
institution which is here under consideration; so that this particular word must
have conveyed to the mind of a Hebrew hearer or reader this notion of a removal of
sins, and none other". The goat is both presented before the Lord, and subsequently
(Leviticus 16:20) offered to him, the priest laying his hands upon him and making a
confession of the sins of the people. After he has thus become the Lord's, how could
he be given up to Satan? The purpose of his being set apart is to make an atonement
with him (not for him, as some commentators explain it wrongly). As atonement was
made by the blood of the sacrificed goat ceremonially covering sin, so it was also
made by the live goat symbolically removing sin. But the atonement in both cases
has reference to God. How could an atonement be made by an offering to Satan,
unless Satan, not God, was the being whose wrath was to be propitiated, and with
whom reconciliation was sought?
10 But the goat chosen by lot as the scapegoat
shall be presented alive before the Lord to be used
for making atonement by sending it into the
wilderness as a scapegoat.
BARNES, "On which the lot fell to be the scapegoat - Rather, on which the lot
‘for Azazel’ fell.
An atonement with him - The goat “for Azazel” was to be considered as taking his
part along with the other goat in the great symbol of atonement.
For a scapegoat into the wilderness - Rather, “to Azazel, into the wilderness.”
74

75. CLARKE, "To be the scape-goat - ‫עזאזל‬ azazel, from ‫עז‬ az, a goat, and ‫אזל‬ azal,
to dismiss; the dismissed or sent away goat, to distinguish it from the goat that was to be
offered in sacrifice. Most ancient nations had vicarious sacrifices, to which they
transferred by certain rites and ceremonies the guilt of the community at large, in the
same manner in which the scapegoat was used by the Jews. The white bull that was
sacrificed by the Egyptians to their god Apis was of this kind; they cut off the head of the
victim which they had sacrificed, and after having loaded it with execrations, “that if
there be any evil hanging over them or the land of Egypt, it may be poured out upon that
head,” they either sold it to the Greeks or threw it into the Nile - See Herod. Euterp., p.
104, edit. Gale.
Petronius Arbiter says that it was a custom among the ancient inhabitants of
Marseilles, whenever they were afflicted by any pestilence, to take one of the poorer
citizens who offered himself for the purpose, and having fed him a whole year with the
purest and best food, they adorned him with vervain, and clothed him with sacred
vestments: they then led him round their city, loading him with execrations; and having
prayed that all the evils to which the city was exposed might fall upon him, they then
precipitated him from the top of a rock - Satiricon, in fine.
Suidas, under the word περιψημα, observes that it was a custom to devote a man
annually to death for the safety of the people, with these words, Περιψἡμα ημων γενου,
Be thou our purifier; and, having said so, to throw him into the sea as a sacrifice to
Neptune. It was probably to this custom that Virgil alludes when speaking of the pilot
Palinurus, who fell into the sea and was drowned, he says: -
Unum pro multis dabiter caput -
Aen., lib. v., ver. 815.
“One life is given for the preservation of many.”
But the nearest resemblance to the scapegoat of the Hebrews is found in the
Ashummeed Jugg of the Hindoos, where a horse is used instead of a goat, the
description of which I shall here introduce from Mr. Halhed’s Code of Gentoo Laws;
Introduction, p. xix. “That the curious,” says he, “may form some idea of this Gentoo
sacrifice when reduced to a symbol, as well as from the subsequent plain account given
of it in a chapter of the Code, sec. ix., p. 127, an explanation of it is here inserted from
Darul Sheküh’s famous Persian translation of some commentaries upon the four Beids,
or original Scriptures of Hindostan. The work itself is extremely scarce, and it was by
mere accident that this little specimen was procured: - “The Ashummeed Jugg does not
merely consist in the performance of that ceremony which is open to the inspection of
the world, namely, in bringing a horse and sacrificing him; but Ashummeed is to be
taken in a mystic signification, as implying that the sacrificer must look upon himself to
be typified in that horse, such as he shall be described; because the religious duty of the
Ashummeed Jugg comprehends all those other religious duties to the performance of
which the wise and holy direct all their actions, and by which all the sincere professors of
every different faith aim at perfection. The mystic signification thereof is as follows: The
head of that unblemished horse is the symbol of the morning; his eyes are the sun; his
breath, the wind; his wide-opening mouth is the bish-waner, or that innate warmth
which invigorates all the world; his body typifies one entire year; his back, paradise; his
belly, the plains; his hoof, this earth; his sides, the four quarters of the heavens; the
75

76. bones thereof, the intermediate spaces between the four quarters; the rest of his limbs
represent all distinct matter; the places where those limbs meet, or his joints, imply the
months, and halves of the months, which are called peche, (or fortnights); his feet
signify night and day; and night and day are of four kinds:
1. The night and day of Brihma;
2. The night and day of angels;
3. The night and day of the world of the spirits of deceased ancestors;
4. The night and day of mortals.
These four kinds are typified in his four feet. The rest of his bones are the
constellations of the fixed stars, which are the twenty-eight stages of the moon’s course,
called the lunar year; his flesh is the clouds; his food, the sand; his tendons, the rivers;
his spleen and liver, the mountains; the hair of his body, the vegetables; and his long
hair, the trees; the forepart of his body typifies the first half of the day, and the hinder
part, the latter half; his yawning is the flash of the lightning, and his turning himself is
the thunder of the cloud; his urine represents the rain, and his mental reflection is his
only speech. The golden vessels which are prepared before the horse is let loose are the
light of the day, and the place where those vessels are kept is a type of the ocean of the
east; the silver vessels which are prepared after the horse is let loose are the light of the
night, and the place where those vessels are kept is a type of the ocean of the west. These
two sorts of vessels are always before and after the horse. The Arabian horse, which on
account of his swiftness is called Hy, is the performer of the journeys of angels; the
Tajee, which is of the race of Persian horses, is the performer of the journeys of the
Kundherps, (or good spirits); the Wazba, which is of the race of the deformed Tazee
horses, is the performer of the journeys of the Jins, (or demons); and the Ashov, which
is of the race of Turkish horses, is the performer of the journeys of mankind: this one
horse which performs these several services on account of his four different sorts of
riders, obtains the four different appellations. The place where this horse remains is the
great ocean, which signifies the great spirit of Perm-Atma, or the universal soul, which
proceeds also from that Perm-Atma, and is comprehended in the same Perm-Atma. The
intent of this sacrifice is, that a man should consider himself to be in the place of that
horse, and look upon all these articles as typified in himself; and conceiving the Atma (or
Divine soul) to be an ocean, should let all thought of self be absorbed in that Atma.” This
sacrifice is explained, in sec. ix., p. 127, of the Code of Hindoo Laws, thus: - “An
Ashummeed Jugg is when a person, having commenced a Jugg, (i. e., religious
ceremony), writes various articles upon a scroll of paper on a horse’s neck, and dismisses
the horse, sending along with the horse a stout and valiant person, equipped with the
best necessaries and accoutrements to accompany the horse day and night
whithersoever he shall choose to go; and if any creature, either man, genius, or dragon,
should seize the horse, that man opposes such attempt, and having gained the victory
upon a battle, again gives the horse his freedom. If any one in this world, or in heaven, or
beneath the earth, would seize this horse, and the horse of himself comes to the house of
the celebrator of the Jugg, upon killing that horse he must throw the flesh of him upon
the fire of the Juk, and utter the prayers of his deity; such a Jugg is called a Jugg
Ashummeed, and the merit of it as a religious work is infinite.” This is a most curious
circumstance; and the coincidence between the religious rites of two people who
probably never had any intercourse with each other, is very remarkable. I would not
however say that the Hindoo ceremony could not have been borrowed from the Jews;
76

77. (though it is very unlikely); no more than I should say, as some have done, that the
Jewish rite was borrowed from the Egyptian sacrifice to Apis mentioned above, which is
still more unlikely. See particularly Clarke’s note on Lev_1:4 (note).
GILL, "But the goat on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat,.... Or for Azazel,
of which more hereafter in the latter part of the verse:
shall be presented alive before the Lord; this seems to be a second presentation;
both the goats were presented before the Lord before the lots were cast, Lev_16:7; but
this was afterwards, when one of the goats, according to the lot, being presented, was
ordered to be killed for a sin offering, and the other according to the lot being presented
alive, was ordered to remain so:
to make an atonement with him; to make an atonement for the sins of the people of
Israel along with the other, for they both made one sin offering, Lev_16:6; and this,
though spared alive for a while, yet at length was killed; and how, the Jewish writers
relate, as will be after observed:
and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness; or, unto Azazel into the
wilderness; which, some understand of a mountain in the wilderness called Azazel, to
which the Targum of Jonathan has respect, which paraphrases the word,"to send him to
die in a place strong and hard, which is in the wilderness of Zuck;''and so Saadiah Gaon,
Jarchi, Kimchi, and others; and one in Aben Ezra says, it was near Mount Sinai; but as it
is rightly observed by some, was this the name of a mountain, Moses would have called it
the mountain Azazel, as he does other mountains by their names: nor is there any
account of any such mountain in those parts, by such who have travelled in it, and if near
Sinai, it was a long way to send it from Jerusalem; and for which there seems to be no
reason, since there were many deserts between those two places: Aben Ezra suggests,
there is a secret or mystery in the word Azazel, and says, you may know it and the
mystery of his name, for he has companions in Scripture; and I will reveal to you, says
he, part of it by a hint, when you are the son of thirty three, you may know its meaning,
that is, by reckoning thirty three verses from Lev_16:8; where this word is first
mentioned, which will fall on Lev_17:7; "they shall no more offer unto devils"; and so R.
Menachem interprets Azazel of Samael, the angel of death, the devil, the prince that hath
power over desolate places: there are several Christian writers of great note, that
understand this of the devil, as Origen (b), among the ancients; and of the moderns,
Cocceius (c), Witsius (d), and Spencer (e), who think that by these two goats is signified
the twofold respect of Christ our Mediator; one to God, as a Judge, to whom he made
satisfaction by his death; the other to the devil, the enemy with whom he conflicted in
life; who, according to prophecy, was to be delivered up to Satan, and have his heel
bruised by him; and who was to come, and did come into the wilderness of this world,
and when Jerusalem was a desert, and became a Roman province; and who was led by
the Spirit into wilderness of Judea, in a literal sense, to be tempted of the devil, and had
a sore conflict with him in the garden, when he sweat, as it were, drops of blood; and
upon the cross, when he submitted to the death of it; during which time he had the sins
of all his people on him, and made an end of them, so as to be seen no more; all which
agrees with Lev_16:21; of which see more there; and it must be owned, that no other
sense seems so well to agree with the type as this; since the living goat had all the sins of
77

78. the people on him, and was reckoned so impure, that he that led him into the wilderness
stood in need of washing and cleansing, Lev_16:21; whereas, when Christ was raised
from the dead, he was clear of all sin, being justified in the Spirit; and in his resurrection
there was no impurity, nor could any be reckoned or supposed to belong to him, as
Witsius well observes, no, not as the surety of his people; nor in his resurrection was he
a sin offering, as this goat was; nor could his ascension to heaven, with any propriety, be
represented by this goat being let go into the wilderness: as for the notion of Barabbas,
as Origen (f), being meant by Azazel, or the rebellious people of the Jews, carried into
the wilderness, or into captivity by Nebuchadnezzar, and which is the sense of Abarbinel,
and in which he is followed by many Christian writers, they need no confutation.
COKE, "Verse 10
Leviticus 16:10. The scape-goat— The opinions respecting this scape-goat, and the
meaning of the original word, have been as various as absurd. The true and mystical
meaning of the ceremony has been pointed out in the observation from Spencer on
the 2nd verse. The sacrifice was evidently of the same kind with that of the two
birds, appointed for the purification of the leper. It is not easy to devise a ceremony
more strongly expressive of the great Sin-offering of the world; who, though
impassible in his Divine Nature, yet suffered and died in his human, the iniquities of
us all being laid upon him; fully expiating which, he entered into heaven itself, to
appear in the presence of God for us, bearing our sins, upon our true confession,
and as it were transferring them to him, Leviticus 16:21 into the land of separation
or forgetfulness, never more to be remembered against us. Hebrews 9:24-26. With
respect to the original word ‫עזאזל‬ azazel, or ozazel, it may be necessary just to
remark, as so much has been said concerning it, that it is derived from ‫עז‬ ez, a goat,
and ‫אזל‬ azel, to go away; a scapegoat: Accordingly the LXX, with us, render it by
αποπομπαιος, sent away; Aquila, τραγον απολελυμενον, the goat dismissed; and
Symmachus, απερχομενον, going away, See Parkhurst on the word.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 10
(10) On which the lot fell to be the scapegoat.—Better, on which the lot “for Azazel”
fell. This one with its distinctive scarlet badge was placed at the spot from whence
he was sent away, and thus stood alive, not presented, before the Lord.
To make an atonement with him.—Better, to make atonement for it, that is, it was
placed before the Lord in order that it might receive expiation and sanctification,
and thus be fitted for the sacred purposes it was destined to fulfil. (See Leviticus
16:16; Leviticus 16:18.)
And to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness.—Better, to send it to Azazel
into the wilderness.
PETT, "Verse 10
78

79. “But the goat, on which the lot fell for ‘azazel, shall be set alive before Yahweh, to
make atonement for him, to send him away for ‘azazel into the wilderness.”
The second he-goat, a part of the purification for sin offering, is to be sent live into
the wilderness where it would be left with God for Him to do with as He will. It is
given into His hands. For it is part of the purification for sin offering and makes
atonement. It is probable therefore that we are to see the two he-goats as ‘one’, and
to see the second as having been ‘sacrificed’ in its clone, the first he-goat, for it is the
blood that makes atonement, and then being dismissed with all the sins of Israel as a
visual evidence of the sins of the whole of the sins and uncleannesses of Israel having
gone. It was intended to be as close a picture as was obtainable of the effects of
purification for sin on this one great day of the year.
PARKER, ""... a scapegoat"— Leviticus 16:10
We must be very careful in the application of this term. It is one of the terms liable
to abuse. The image has always been accepted as one symbolical of the work of
Christ in bearing away the sins of the world. Considered strictly as a figure, it is full
of beauty and helpful suggestiveness. It has, nevertheless, been open to the most
mischievous perversion. We use the term now too freely in describing the action of a
man who wishes to lay upon another the blame of actions which he himself has done
We speak of certain men as being "mere scapegoats"; as if they had been dragged in
to meet the necessities of a situation and to relieve others from the burden of just
penalties.—The figure is not the less appropriate that it is open to perversion.—
Sometimes the value of an analogy depends upon the fineness and even subtlety of
its relations. We are never at liberty to abuse an analogy. Jesus Christ comes before
us in the aspect of one who voluntarily takes upon himself our sins and bears them
away so that they never can be found again.—Notice that he accepts the position
voluntarily.—Notice that he himself actually proposes to become, in this sense, the
Scapegoat of the human family.—Notice also that the sinner must be a consenting
party to this most mysterious arrangement.—The Scapegoat does not come into the
world and carry away the sins of mankind in any arbitrary fashion.—Every sinner
must put his hands, as it were, upon the Christ of God, and by that act intimate his
desire that Christ would bear his sins away.—Do not make a mere convenience of
Christ.—Do not consider the presence of the Scapegoat a licence to sin.—The
deceitful heart may say,—Take your own course, do just what you please, and at the
end of the sinful day place all your iniquities upon the head of the Scapegoat, and he
will bear them away into the wilderness of oblivion.—This is perversion; this is
more than perversion, it is unpardonable blasphemy.—Blessed is the thought that
the sin is borne away where it can never be found any more.—To have the memory
of sin, to be for ever reminded of the commission of sin, to suffer all the inflictions
possible to imagination in connection with sin, would be to destroy the very heaven
which is connected with forgiveness.—In some mysterious way, not to be measured
by human words or even conceived by human thought, sin is cast away where even
the accuser cannot find it, or the enemy bring it back to fling it in our burning
face.—This is a divine dispensation. It is therefore not to be explained or made easy
79

80. to the comprehension of mere reason. It is rather to be accepted by faith and by
love, and being so accepted, the heart is aware of its certainty of preciousness by the
sweet peace which steals into it and rules it into profound repose.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:10. For a scape-goat — This seems to be the most literal
and obvious meaning of the original word ‫,אזאזל‬ Azazel, evidently derived from ‫,עז‬
ez, or gnez, a goat, and ‫,אזל‬ azel, to go away. In this sense the Seventy understand it,
rendering the word αποπομπαιος, sent away; Aquila also, who translates it
απολελυμενον, dismissed; and Symmachus, who renders it απερχομενον, going
away. Nor does there appear to be any solid reason for thinking it was the name of a
mountain, to which the goat was sent, much less that the angel of death, or the devil,
was intended by the word, as some have said; for surely in that case it could be no
type of Christ’s resurrection, as it is generally supposed to have been.HEDON, " 10.
To make atonement with him — R.V. “for him.” In Leviticus 1:4 the same Hebrew
words are translated “to make atonement for him.” Bahr says, that the means of
atonement is never marked by ‫,על‬ upon or for, but always by ‫,ב‬ with, and that the
former regularly marks the object of the atonement. Hengstenberg also concurs
with this view, and remarks that by the live goat being said to be atoned for, “he was
thereby identified with the first, and the nature of the dead was transferred to the
living;” so that “the goats stand here in a relation entirely similar to that of the two
birds in the purification of the leper, of which the one let go was first dipped in the
blood of the slain.” Leviticus 14:7 .
Into the wilderness — Wilderness, with the article, as here, signifies either the desert
lying next to the speaker, or the well-known Arabian desert, or that about Petra.
11 “Aaron shall bring the bull for his own sin
offering to make atonement for himself and his
household, and he is to slaughter the bull for his
own sin offering.
BARNES, "It is important, in reference to the meaning of the day of atonement, to
observe the order of the rites as they are described in these verses.
GILL, "And Aaron shall bring the bullock of the sin offering which is for
80

81. himself,.... In the same manner, and is to be understood in the same sense as in Lev_
16:6,
and shall make atonement for himself and for his house: by a confession of
words, as the Targum of Jonathan adds, and which Jarchi calls the second confession;
for the same was made, and in the same words as before; see Gill on Lev_16:6,
and shall kill the bullock of the sin offering which is for himself; which was a
type of Christ; the creature itself was, being strong for labour, and patient in bearing the
yoke; Christ had a laborious service to perform, the work of man's redemption, and he
was strong for it, able to go through it, and did not only readily take upon him the yoke
of the law, and became obedient to every command of his divine Father, but even to
death itself, the death of the cross; the kind of sacrifice was a sin offering, and such
Christ in soul and body was made for his people; in order to which, as this sacrifice, he
was put to death, the use of which was, to atone for all the sins of his mystical self, his
body, the church; for all his family, his children, the priests of the Lord.
JAMISON 11-19, "Aaron shall bring the bullock of the sin offering which is
for himself, etc. — The first part of the service was designed to solemnize his own
mind, as well as the minds of the people, by offering the sacrifices for their sins. The sin
offerings being slain had the sins of the offerer judicially transferred to them by the
imputation of his hands on their head (Lev_4:4, Lev_4:15, Lev_4:24, Lev_4:29, Lev_
4:33); and thus the young bullock, which was to make atonement for himself and the
other priests (called “his house,” Psa_135:19), was killed by the hands of the high priest.
While the blood of the victim was being received into a vessel, taking a censer of live
coals in his right hand and a platter of sweet incense in his left, he, amid the solemn
attention and the anxious prayers of the assembled multitude, crossed the porch and the
holy place, opened the outer veil which led into the holy of holies and then the inner veil.
Standing before the ark, he deposited the censer of coals on the floor, emptied the plate
of incense into his hand, poured it on the burning coals; and the apartment was filled
with fragrant smoke, intended, according to Jewish writers, to prevent any
presumptuous gazer prying too curiously into the form of the mercy seat, which was the
Lord’s throne. The high priest having done this, perfumed the sanctuary, returned to the
door, took the blood of the slain bullock, and, carrying it into the holy of holies,
sprinkled it with his finger once upon the mercy seat “eastward” - that is, on the side
next to himself; and seven times “before the mercy seat” - that is, on the front of the ark.
Leaving the coals and the incense burning, he went out a second time, to sacrifice at the
altar of burnt offering the goat which had been assigned as a sin offering for the people;
and carrying its blood into the holy of holies, he made similar sprinklings as he had done
before with the blood of the bullock. While the high priest was thus engaged in the most
holy place, none of the ordinary priests were allowed to remain within the precincts of
the tabernacle. The sanctuary or holy place and the altar of burnt offering were in like
manner sprinkled seven times with the blood of the bullock and the goat. The object of
this solemn ceremonial was to impress the minds of the Israelites with the conviction
that the whole tabernacle was stained by the sins of a guilty people, that by their sins
they had forfeited the privileges of the divine presence and worship, and that an
atonement had to be made as the condition of God’s remaining with them. The sins and
shortcomings of the past year having polluted the sacred edifice, the expiation required
to be annually renewed. The exclusion of the priests indicated their unworthiness and
81

82. the impurities of their service. The mingled blood of the two victims being sprinkled on
the horns of the altar indicated that the priests and the people equally needed an
atonement for their sins. But the sanctuary being thus ceremonially purified, and the
people of Israel reconciled by the blood of the consecrated victim, the Lord continued to
dwell in the midst of them, and to honor them with His gracious presence.
K&D 11-14, "He was then to slay the bullock of the sin-offering, and make atonement
for himself and his house (or family, i.e., for the priests, Lev_16:33). But before bringing
the blood of the sin-offering into the most holy place, he was to take “the filling of the
censer (machtah, a coal-pan, Exo_25:38) with fire-coals,” i.e., as many burning coals as
the censer would hold, from the altar of burnt-offering, and “the filling of his hands,”
i.e., two hands full of “fragrant incense” (Exo_30:34), and go with this within the vail,
i.e., into the most holy place, and there place the incense upon the fire before Jehovah,
“that the cloud of (burning) incense might cover the capporeth above the testimony,
and he might not die.” The design of these instructions was not that the holiest place, the
place of Jehovah's presence, might be hidden by the cloud of incense from the gaze of
the unholy eye of man, and so he might separate himself reverentially from it, that the
person approaching might not be seized with destruction. But as burning incense was a
symbol of prayer, this covering of the capporeth with the cloud of incense was a
symbolical covering of the glory of the Most Holy One with prayer to God, in order that
He might not see the sin, nor suffer His holy wrath to break forth upon the sinner, but
might graciously accept, in the blood of the sin-offering, the souls for which it was
presented. Being thus protected by the incense from the wrath of the holy God, he was to
sprinkle (once) some of the blood of the ox with his finger, first upon the capporeth in
front, i.e., not upon the top of the capporeth, but merely upon or against the front of it,
and then seven times before the capporeth, i.e., upon the ground in front of it. It is here
assumed as a matter of course, that when the offering of incense was finished, he would
necessarily come out of the most holy place again, and go to the altar of burnt-offering to
fetch some of the blood of the ox which had been slaughtered there.
COFFMAN, "Verse 11
"And Aaron shall present the bullock of the sin-offering, which is for himself, and
shall make atonement for himself, and for his house, and shall kill the bullock of the
sin-offering which is for himself: and he shall take a censer full of coals of fire and
from off the altar before Jehovah, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small,
and bring it within the veil: and he shall put the incense upon the fire before
Jehovah, and the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy-seat that is upon the
testimony, that he die not: and he shall take of the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle
it with his finger upon the mercy-seat on the east; and before the mercy-seat shall he
sprinkle the blood with his finger seven times."
"That the cloud of incense may cover the mercy-seat ..." "This did not cover the
`glory' that Aaron might not gaze upon it, but it covered him that Jehovah might
not look upon him and his sin!"[23]
82

83. Aaron's entering into the supreme sanctuary, the Holy of Holies to sprinkle the
blood upon the mercy-seat symbolized the entry of Jesus Christ, our High Priest,
into heaven itself, the Most Holy place indeed, there to offer his blood once for all
for the cleansing and forgiveness of sins. That it was "within the veil" means that
Christ offered his blood in heaven, after he passed through the veil of death. (See
Hebrews 8-10 for remarkably full discussion of all the analogies here.)
ELLICOTT, " (11) And Aaron shall bring the bullock.—Having formally dedicated
the bullock for his own sin offering (see Leviticus 16:6), and after the two goats
which constituted the people’s sin offering had been presented and their lots decided
(Leviticus 16:7-10), Aaron comes back to his own sin offering a second time. He
again laid both his hands on the victim and repeated the confession for himself, for
his house, and for the whole priesthood, as given in Leviticus 16:6.
And shall make an atonement for himself.—His own sins had first to be expiated
before he could offer the atoning sacrifices for the people. (Comp. Hebrews 5:3;
Hebrews 9:7.)
And shall kill the bullock.—Being a sacrifice offered up for himself the high priest,
like any layman, had to slaughter the victim, and could not delegate this work to
anyone else. (See Leviticus 1:5.) He received the blood in the sprinkling bowl, which
he handed over to a priest to stir the blood lest it should coagulate while he
performed the fumigation.
PETT, "Verse 11
“And Aaron shall present the bull ox of the purification for sin offering, which is for
himself, and shall make atonement for himself, and for his house, and shall kill the
bull ox of the purification for sin offering which is for himself,”
The detail of the ‘presenting’ of the bull ox is repeated from verse 6, in order to
remind us what the offering is for, and then amplified into the actual offering up of
it by slaughter. There is a certain repetition in the following verses in order to make
quite clear precisely what happens and what its significance is. Such repetition was
common in ancient writings.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:11. The bullock — Mentioned in general, Leviticus 16:6;
the ceremonies respecting which are here particularly described. This was a very
different sacrifice from that of the red heifer spoken of Numbers 19., as evidently
appears upon comparing the two places. He shall kill the bullock which is for
himself — Here we may clearly see, as the apostle to the Hebrews argues, the utter
insufficiency of the Jewish dispensation to “make the comers thereunto perfect,” or
to furnish those who were under it with every thing necessary for their complete
justification and salvation. It made nothing perfect, because it made men priests
that were sinful creatures like others, and had need to offer year after year for their
83

84. own sins; for “there was a remembrance made again of sins every year.” But in
Christ we have a very different high-priest and intercessor, who is, and when on
earth was, holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners, and higher than the
heavens, who needeth not daily (as the Jewish high-priests) to offer up sacrifices
first for his own sins and then for the people’s: for this he did; he offered for the
people’s sins, having none of his own to expiate, once when he offered up himself.
For “the law made men priests which had infirmity, but the word of the oath, which
was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore, and is able to
save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make
intercession for them.”
WHEDON, " A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF CERTAIN RITES, Leviticus
16:11-28.
11. Bullock for himself — It must be purchased with the money of the high priest.
And for his house — The entire priesthood. There is an antitype; “Ye also, as lively
stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy-priesthood, to offer up spiritual
sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” 1 Peter 2:5.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:11 And Aaron shall bring the bullock of the sin offering,
which [is] for himself, and shall make an atonement for himself, and for his house,
and shall kill the bullock of the sin offering which [is] for himself:
Ver. 11. An atonement for himself.] That having first made his own peace, he may
be in case to atone for the people. This was David’s method. [Psalms 25:1-22 Psalms
51:1-19]
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:11
After having offered the bullock for his own sin offering, and presented the two
goats, which constituted the sin offering of the people, and offered one of them,
Aaron kills the bullock for the sin offering. A considerable interval had to elapse
before he could make use of the bullock's blood for purposes of propitiation, and
during this interval, occupied by his entrance into the holy of holies with the
incense, the blood was held by an attendant, probably by one of his sons, and
prevented from coagulating by being kept in motion.
12 He is to take a censer full of burning coals from
the altar before the Lord and two handfuls of
84

85. finely ground fragrant incense and take them
behind the curtain.
BARNES, "Lev_16:12
A censer - See Exo_25:38 note.
The altar before the Lord - i. e. the altar of burnt-offering on which the fire was
always burning.
GILL, "And he shall take a censer,.... A fire pan, a sort of chafing dish or perfuming
pot; this was a golden one, as appears from Heb_9:4; hence Christ, the Angel of God's
presence, our interceding High Priest, is said to have such an one, Rev_8:3; and so
Josephus says (g), it was a golden one the high priest used on the day of atonement; with
which agree the Misnic doctors (h), who say, on other days he took off the coals with a
silver one, and poured them into a golden one, but on this day he took them off with a
golden one:
full of burning coals of fire from off the altar before the Lord; these were
bright lively coals, not smoking and half extinct; and they were taken from off the altar of
burnt offering, from the western side of it, as Jarchi says, which was towards the holy of
holies, where the Lord had his dwelling: these burning coals denoted the sufferings of
Christ, which were properly punishments for the sins he bore, flowed from the wrath of
God comparable to fire, were the curses of a fiery law, and equal to the sufferings of the
wicked, often expressed by fire; they were many, and very painful and excruciating,
though no ways inconsistent with the love of God to him as his Son, for they were
endured by him as the surety of his people, and by which he expressed his flaming love
and affection for them: he himself is altar, sacrifice, and priest, the altar which sanctifies
the gift; and the coals as on the altar, denote the sufferings of Christ as upon him, which
he was able to bear; and the taking off the coals signifies the cessation of his sufferings;
and the altar, coals, and taking of them off, being before the Lord and in his sight, show
that Christ, as a divine Person, is, and always was before him; that his sufferings were
ever in view, being appointed and foretold by him, and when endured were grateful to
him, a sacrifice of a sweet smelling savour; and that the cessation of them was in his
presence, and according to his will; and Christ now is the Lamb in the midst of the
throne, as though he had been slain, where, as such, he is always beheld with pleasure
and acceptance by the Lord:
and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small; both his hands, as Aben Ezra,
two handfuls of this he took and put into a cup: of this sweet incense and its
composition, see Exo_30:34; this was small itself, but on the evening of the day of
atonement it was put into the mortar again, as Jarchi says, and beaten very small, and so
was, as expressed in the Misnah (i), "small of small": this may represent the intercession
of Christ our high priest for his people; for as the prayers of the saints are set before the
Lord as incense, Psa_141:2; so the intercession and mediation of Christ in favour of the
acceptance of their prayers is signified by "much incense", Rev_8:3; and which is always
85

86. acceptable to God, and may well be expressed by sweet incense: handfuls of it may
denote the largeness of his intercession, being for all the elect of God, and for all things
for them they stand in need of; and the infinite perfection and virtue of his person,
blood, righteousness, and sacrifice, to make his intercession effectual: and being "beaten
small" may signify his intercession made for particular persons, and those the meanest,
and for particular things of every sort they want; as well as it may point at the fragrance
and acceptance of Christ's mediation on such accounts, the incense being more fragrant
the smaller it is beaten:
and bring it within the vail: not the incense only, but the burning coals of fire also,
the one in one hand, and the other in the other hand; so the Misnah (k); they brought
out to him (the high priest) the cup and the censer; he took his handful and put it into
the cup, a large one according to its largeness, and a small one according to its
smallness, and so was its measure; he took the censer in his right hand, and the cup in
his left, and went into the sanctuary, until he came between the two rails which divide
between the holy and holy of holies: this was typical of Christ our high priest, who is
entered within the vail into the holiest of all, with his blood, righteousness, and sacrifice,
where he ever lives to make intercession for us; not that Christ is considered in heaven
as in a suffering state, for he is in a most exalted one; but the virtue and efficacy of his
sufferings and death always continue, and which he ever improves on the behalf of his
people, by interceding for them; and their faith and hope enter within the vail, and deal
with him as having suffered for them.
CALVIN, "12.And he shall take a censer full. Before he takes the blood into the
sanctuary, (the priest) is commanded to offer incense. There was, as we have seen,
an altar of incense, on which the priest burnt it, but without the veil; but now he is
ordered to go within the veil, to make (246) an incense-offering in the very holy of
holies. But it is worth noticing, that is said that the cloud of the incense should cover
the mercy-seat — that the priest die not; for by this sign it was shewn how
formidable is God’s majesty, the sight of which is fatal even to the priest; that all
might learn to tremble at it, and to prostrate themselves as suppliants before Him;
and again, that all audacity and temerity might be repressed. But it is uncertain
whether he killed together the bullock for himself and the goat for the people, or
whether, after he had sprinkled the sanctuary with his own offering, he killed the
goat separately. Moses indeed seems to mark this distinct order in the words he
uses; for after having spoken of the first sprinkling, he immediately adds, “Then
shall he kill the goat of the sin-offering:” but since the narrative of Moses is not
always consecutive, and it is a matter of little importance, let the reader choose
which he pleases.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 12
(12) A censer full of burning coals.—After the bullock was slain, and before its
blood was sprinkled, the high priest took the censer, which on this occasion was a
golden one, and filled it with brightly glowing coals. These he took off from that
part of the ever-burning fire on the altar of burnt offering or brazen altar which
was next to the west, towards the Holy of Holies, where the Lord had His dwelling.
86

87. This is the sense which the canonical law attached to the phrase here “before the
Lord.”
And his hands full of sweet incense.—Having provided himself with two handfuls of
the finest incense, and holding the censer with the fire in his right hand, and the cup
with the incense in his left, he now entered for the first time through the second vail
into the Holy of Holies, advanced to the ark of the covenant, and deposited the
censer between its two staves. During the second Temple he stepped forward to the
stone which was the substitute of the Ark, and placed the censer upon it.
PETT, "Verse 12
“And he shall take a censer full of coals of fire from off the altar before Yahweh,
and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within the veil,”
The next step before the blood can be presented within the veil is to prepare the way
for his entry. He has already sacrificed the bull ox for his own sins. Now, prior to
taking its blood behind the veil into the Holy of Holies, he must first take a censer
full of coals from the altar into the Holy of Holies, with the sweet incense beaten
small in his other hand, of the type laid down by Yahweh and specially prepared.
WHEDON, " 12. The altar before the Lord — The great or brazen altar.
Sweet incense — Aromatic spices. Since the cloud of sweet incense symbolizes
ascending prayer perfumed by the merits of the great Mediator, the Hebrew was
taught that after his representative had with all pains purified himself, he must
come into the holy presence, not on the ground of right, but as a suppliant imploring
mercy.
Beaten small — It was pulverized, that, when thrown into the censer, it might
instantly produce a cloud of smoke, to soften the intense brightness of the shekinah
between the cherubim.
Within the vail — The holy of holies.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:12 And he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire
from off the altar before the LORD, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten
small, and bring [it] within the vail:
Ver. 12. And bring it within the vail.] So to prepare the way into the holy place. This
incense small beaten might prefigure Christ in his agony, praying more earnestly,
before he entered with his own blood into the most holy place of heaven.
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:12, Leviticus 16:13
This is the first entry of the high priest into the holy of holies. He takes with him a
87

88. censer—literally, the censer, that is, the censer that he was to use on the occasion—
full of burning coals of fire from off the altar; and his hands are full of sweet incense
beaten small; his object being to fill the holy of holies with the smoke of the incense
which may serve as at least a thin vail between himself and the Presence of the Lord,
that he die not (cf. Exodus 33:20, "Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no
man see me, and live;" cf. also Genesis 32:30; Deuteronomy 5:24; 6:22; 13:22). Here
we see taught the lesson of the vision of God, as he is, being impossible to the human
faculties. He must be vailed in one way or another. After passing through the outer
chamber of the tabernacle, the high priest found himself in the smaller chamber
where stood the ark. Immediately he threw the incense on the coals of the censer,
until the holy of holies was filled with the smoke, after which, according to later
practice, he offered a prayer outside the vail. The following form of prayer,
breathing, however, the spirit of ages long subsequent to the tabernacle, or even the
first temple, is found in the Talmud:—"May it please thee, O Lord our God, the
God of our fathers, that neither this day nor this year any captivity come upon us.
Yet if captivity befall us this day or this year, let it be to a place where the Law is
cultivated. May it please thee, O Lord our God, the God of our fathers, that want
come not upon us this day or this year. But if want visit us this day or this year, let it
be due to the liberality of our charitable deeds. May it please thee, O Lord, the God
of our fathers, that this year may be a year of cheapness, of fullness, of intercourse
and trade; a year with abundance of rain, of sunshine, and of dew; one in which thy
people Israel shall not require assistance one from another. And listen not to the
prayers of those who are about to set out on a journey (against rain). And as to thy
people Israel, may no enemy exalt himself against them. May it please thee, O Lord
our God, the God of our fathers, that the houses of the men of Saron (exposed to
floods) may not become their graves" (Edersheim, 'Temple Service').
13 He is to put the incense on the fire before the
Lord, and the smoke of the incense will conceal
the atonement cover above the tablets of the
covenant law, so that he will not die.
GILL, "And he shall put the incense upon the fire before the Lord,.... Both the
incense and burning coals of fire being carried within the vail, the incense was put upon
the coals, and so it burned before the Lord, whose seat was between the cherubim; and
88

89. from whence it appears, that this was done, not without but within the vail: the
Sadducees under the second temple would have it, that the incense was put upon the fire
without the vail, wherefore the high priest, on the evening of this day, was sworn by the
messengers of the sanhedrim not to make any alteration in what they should say to him;
and this oath was given him in the house of Abtines, where the incense was made, with a
special respect to that, since it being within the vail, they could not see it performed: the
manner of his performance of this part of his service is thus related; he went in between
the rails, till he came to the north; when he was come to the north, he turned his face to
the south; he went on his left hand near the vail, till he came to the ark; he put the censer
between the two bars, and heaped the incense upon the top of the coals, and the whole
house was filled with the smoke; he then went out backwards, and prayed a short prayer
in the outward house (the holy place), and he did not continue long in prayer, lest the
people of Israel should be frightened (l): the prayer he made is given us by the Jews (m):
now the incense being put upon the coals may denote the fervour and ardency of Christ's
intercession, and that his sufferings are the foundation of it, on which it proceeds, and
are what give it a grateful odour, or make it acceptable to the Lord:
and this was done, that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy seat
that is upon the testimony; where was the Shechinah, or glorious majesty of God,
and which was not to be seen, and therefore to be covered after this manner; which
shows, that there is no access to God but as upon a seat of mercy and a throne of grace;
and even that there is no coming to him upon that, but through the mediation and
intercession of Christ:
that he die not; as his sons did, boldly intruding where, and doing what they should
not: there is no approaching to God as an absolute God, and live; but through Christ the
Mediator, and his intercession, believers may draw nigh and see the face of God in
Christ, and live, as Jacob did, Gen_32:30.
COKE, "Verse 13
Leviticus 16:13. He shall put the incense, &c.— The bullock being slain, the high-
priest was to take some of the blood of it into the holy of holies, bearing in his hand
a censer with incense burning upon it, to prevent him from seeing the mercy-seat,
lest the Divine Presence should be too bright for him, and occasion his death: and,
accordingly, the Jews tell us, that he entered side-ways, not daring to look directly
upon the glory of the place; and that, having filled the sanctuary with a cloud of
smoke, he went out backward, having his face directed to the mercy-seat: this done,
he was to sprinkle the blood seven times upon the mercy-seat. Ainsworth well
observes, that the burning of incense, preceding the sprinkling of the blood, served
as a preparation to the high-priest's admission into the holy place by prayer; which,
as we have before observed, was figured by incense, and with which it was
accompanied, Revelation 8:3-4 and further, hereby the merits of Christ's
intercession were signified, through which alone our prayers and our persons
become acceptable, and we obtain an access to God, even the Father.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 13
89

90. (13) And he shall put the incense.—The high priest now threw the incense upon the
coals in the censer, in the Holy of Holies, and stayed there till the whole place was
filled with a cloud of smoke, taking special care that the mercy seat and the
cherubim should be enveloped in the cloud. Whereupon he left the Holy of Holies,
walking backward, with his face to the holy place and his back to the Temple. Upon
his emerging from within the second vail, and arriving in the Holy place, he
pronounced the following prayer :—“May it please Thee, O Lord my God, that if
this year was intended to be one of drought, it be one of rain. May he who rules over
the house of Judah not die. May Thy people not be in want, so that one should beg
bread from another or from strangers; and let not the prayers of travellers come
before Thee” [because they pray that no rain may fall].
PETT, "Verse 13
“And he shall put the incense on the fire before Yahweh, that the cloud of the
incense may cover the mercy-seat that is on the testimony, that he die not,”
And there he must burn the incense on the coals of fire so that the cloud from the
incense covers the mercy seat that is over the tables of the Law, hiding it from his
gaze. The implication is that otherwise he would die. The censer is then left in the
Holy of Holies so as to continue producing the cloud.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:13. He shall put the incense upon the fire — The high-
priest, having begun the solemn service with slaying the bullock, as a sin-offering of
deprecation and atonement for himself and the other priests, lighted his incense-
vessel, or censer, at the great altar of burnt-offering, and at his entrance into the
holy of holies, threw the incense upon the burning coals, and so filled the place with
a cloud of smoke, to prevent him from seeing the ark, and being struck with the
glory issuing from between the cherubims, where the Shechinah or emblem of the
divine presence resided: or, as others say, that he might not offend by too curiously
gazing on the symbols of the divine glory. If we may believe the Jews, he entered
sideways, as not daring to look directly on the glory of the place, and that, having
filled the sanctuary with a cloud of smoke, he went out backward, having his face
directed toward the mercy-seat, in reverence for the divine majesty, which was there
represented.
WHEDON, " 13. Before the Lord — This must here signify in the most holy place.
It was considered a grave mistake, amounting to a sacrilege, in a certain Sadducean
high priest to dare to kindle the incense without the vail and to carry it smoking
within. Since the holy of holies was left in utter darkness, the venture of the high
priest into the “thick darkness” where God dwelt strikingly illustrates the faith
which is required to approach the mercy seat, where the “light inaccessible” veils
itself in the cloud.
That he die not — Death through neglect of these precautions may have been
natural, and not judicial. See Numbers 4:18, note. “Thou canst not see my face: for
90

91. there shall no man see me, and live.” Exodus 33:20. “Common priests burned
incense every day at the altar without the vail. Only once a year, and only after the
most careful preparation, goes the high priest into the holiest. If he fail in his
preparation he is liable to die. To ask a confirmatory sign of only Gabriel’s message
in the holy place, outside the holiest, is to get dumbness for a sign. The high priest
went into the holiest with a cord attached, that his body might be drawn out if he
were slain.” — Bishop H.W. Warren. The command that the priest envelop himself
in a cloud of incense when he raises the curtain expresses the fact that full and
cloudless communion with God was not realized under the Old Testament
sacrifices; that not until Jesus “by his own blood entered in once into the holy place,
having obtained eternal redemption for us,” were we able with “boldness to enter
into the holiest by the blood of Jesus;” nor until then could believers enjoy the
crowning blessing in the gift of God, the “communion of the Holy Ghost.” John
14:16; 2 Corinthians 13:14.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:13 And he shall put the incense upon the fire before the
LORD, that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy seat that [is] upon the
testimony, that he die not:
Ver. 13. May cover the mercy seat.] And so be as a screen betwixt the priest and
those everlasting burnings: or as a cloud to darken the glory of their shining, for the
high priest’s safety.
14 He is to take some of the bull’s blood and with
his finger sprinkle it on the front of the atonement
cover; then he shall sprinkle some of it with his
finger seven times before the atonement cover.
BARNES, "Lev_16:14
The high priest must have come out from the most holy place to fetch the blood,
leaving the censer smoking within, and then have entered again within the veil. He
sprinkled the blood seven times upon the mercy-seat, on its east side (not “eastward”),
and then seven times upon the floor in front of it. If the mercy-seat may be regarded as
an altar, the holiest one of the three, on this one occasion in the year atonement was thus
made for it, as for the other altars, with sacrificial blood.
91

92. GILL, "And he shall put the incense upon the fire before the Lord,.... Both the
incense and burning coals of fire being carried within the vail, the incense was put upon
the coals, and so it burned before the Lord, whose seat was between the cherubim; and
from whence it appears, that this was done, not without but within the vail: the
Sadducees under the second temple would have it, that the incense was put upon the fire
without the vail, wherefore the high priest, on the evening of this day, was sworn by the
messengers of the sanhedrim not to make any alteration in what they should say to him;
and this oath was given him in the house of Abtines, where the incense was made, with a
special respect to that, since it being within the vail, they could not see it performed: the
manner of his performance of this part of his service is thus related; he went in between
the rails, till he came to the north; when he was come to the north, he turned his face to
the south; he went on his left hand near the vail, till he came to the ark; he put the censer
between the two bars, and heaped the incense upon the top of the coals, and the whole
house was filled with the smoke; he then went out backwards, and prayed a short prayer
in the outward house (the holy place), and he did not continue long in prayer, lest the
people of Israel should be frightened (l): the prayer he made is given us by the Jews (m):
now the incense being put upon the coals may denote the fervour and ardency of Christ's
intercession, and that his sufferings are the foundation of it, on which it proceeds, and
are what give it a grateful odour, or make it acceptable to the Lord:
and this was done, that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy seat
that is upon the testimony; where was the Shechinah, or glorious majesty of God,
and which was not to be seen, and therefore to be covered after this manner; which
shows, that there is no access to God but as upon a seat of mercy and a throne of grace;
and even that there is no coming to him upon that, but through the mediation and
intercession of Christ:
that he die not; as his sons did, boldly intruding where, and doing what they should
not: there is no approaching to God as an absolute God, and live; but through Christ the
Mediator, and his intercession, believers may draw nigh and see the face of God in
Christ, and live, as Jacob did, Gen_32:30.
COKE, "Leviticus 16:14. And he shall take of the blood, &c.— Houbigant renders
this verse, Then, taking part of the blood of the bullock, he shall sprinkle it seven
times towards the east, over-against the vail: in like manner he shall sprinkle it
seven times with his finger before the mercy-seat. Note; Jesus, our better High-
Priest, is for us entered into the holy place, with nobler Blood, even his own; an
Atonement which once offered, is complete and everlasting. Blessed be God for such
a High-Priest!
ELLICOTT, " (14) And he shall take of the blood.—Having left the Holy place and
returned to the court, where the priest stood with the bowl of the blood of the
bullock, stirring it, to prevent it coagulating (see Leviticus 16:11), the high priest
took it, and went back to the Holy of Holies, to the same place where he stood on his
first entry.
Sprinkle it with his finger.—During the second Temple the high priest sprinkled the
92

93. blood once upwards and seven times downwards, in such a manner that the eight
sprinklings formed a continuous line on the ground. As he sprinkled he was obliged
to count one, two, three, &c, lest he should make a mistake.
PETT, "Verse 14
“And he shall take of the blood of the bull ox, and sprinkle it with his finger on the
mercy-seat on the east, and before the mercy-seat shall he sprinkle of the blood with
his finger seven times.”
Then he must retire to collect the blood of the bull ox and make a second entry into
the Holy of Holies in order to sprinkle the blood on the mercy seat on the east, and
before the mercy seat seven times. Note that he sprinkles on the nearest side only,
not on all four sides. He is only a temporary visitor here with restricted rights, and
even now must not come too close. The ‘seven times’ indicates completeness. He then
retires again.
The Holy of Holies would be in complete darkness lit only by the coals from the
censer and a very faint light coming through from the golden lampstand through
the gap in the veil through which the High Priest comes. And there in the dark
shadow would be the famed and revered Ark of the covenant of Yahweh. (After the
Exile all that would be there was a large stone put there to serve as a substitute until
the Ark could be returned. Or at least the latter was what many believed). But the
Priest would not be gazing. He would be carrying through his ministry as discreetly
as possible, probably with his head bowed.
BENSON, "Verse 14
Leviticus 16:14. He shall take of the blood — He went out of the holy place, and
then entered it a second time. We must observe, that as the burning of the incense
preceded the sprinkling of the blood, it was hereby signified that he was to be
prepared for entering into the most holy place by prayer, and was to enter it in a
spirit of prayer, which was figured by incense, and which the offering of incense
accompanied, Revelation 8:3-4. A lively emblem this of the intercession of our great
High-Priest, and the efficacy of his merits. He shall sprinkle it upon the mercy-
seat — To teach us, that God is merciful to sinners only through and for the blood
of Christ. With his face eastward, or upon the eastern part, toward the people, who
were in the court which lay eastward from the holy of holies, which was the most
western part of the tabernacle. This signified that the high-priest in this act
represented the people, and that God accepted it on their behalf; before the mercy-
seat — On the ground.
WHEDON, "14. Upon the mercy seat — Eastward. Luther’s version is very literal,
“Gegen den Gnadenstuhl sprengen vorn an,” Sprinkle against the mercy seat in
front. Our English version is opposed to every Jewish authority. Ewald, however,
supports it, while the Vulgate omits these words. Outram and Murphy insist that
93

94. “the blood did not come upon the mercy seat, but fell upon the ground.” The
“Seventy” follows the ambiguity of the Hebrew, which is, “upon the face of the
mercy seat eastward.” This may direct that the eastern or front side of the ark and
the front edge of its cover, the mercy-seat, be stained with blood, or that the blood
drops be sprinkled on the east side of the ark, between it and the vail. If the latter be
the meaning the last clause of the verse is a repetition for the purpose of
emphasizing the seven times to denote the perfection of the expiation. “The bearing
of the blood of expiation into the most holy place, where no Israelite ever entered
save the high priest, taught that the true expiation could only be effected by one who
should pass into the presence of God, and leave the door wide open for all to
enter.” — Dr. A. McLaren. “The anti-typal correlative of the presentation of the
blood before the mercy seat was our Lord’s appearance before God the Father,
bearing in his glorified body (identical with that which suffered) his own precious
blood, now glorified, yet still identical with that which had been shed. That high-
priestly self-presentation of the Redeemer is the eternal conclusion and ratifying
seal of the work of redemption.” — Delitzsch on the Epistle to the Hebrews. See
Leviticus 6:27, note, on the blood of Christ in heaven.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:14 And he shall take of the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle
[it] with his finger upon the mercy seat eastward; and before the mercy seat shall he
sprinkle of the blood with his finger seven times.
Ver. 14. Upon the mercy seat eastward.] This and the following verses signify, saith
one, that even heaven itself is defiled unto us by our sins; until it be made clean by
the blood and obedience of Christ, who is entered thither, "not by the blood of goats
and calves, but by his own blood," and thereby hath "purified the heavenly things
themselves." [Hebrews 9:12; Hebrews 9:23]
PULPIT, "The second entry of the high priest into the holy of holies took place very
soon after the first entry. Immediately that he had returned after lighting the
incense, and perhaps offering a prayer, he took of the blood of the bullock, which he
had previously killed, went back without delay, and sprinkled it with his finger
upon the mercy seat eastward, that is, on the front of the ark beneath the Presence
enthroned upon the mercy seat, and shrouded by the smoke of the incense; and
before the mercy seat, that is, on the ground in front of it, he sprinkled of the blood
with his finger seven times. In after times, when the ark was gone, the high priest
sprinkled upwards once and downwards seven times.
15 “He shall then slaughter the goat for the sin
offering for the people and take its blood behind
the curtain and do with it as he did with the bull’s
94

95. blood: He shall sprinkle it on the atonement cover
and in front of it.
BARNES, "Lev_16:15
Having completed the atonement in the holy of holies on behalf of the priests, the high
priest had now to do the same thing on behalf of the people.
GILL, "Then shall he kill the goat of the sin offering that is for the people,....
That upon which the lot came for the Lord, Lev_16:9; the high priest having sprinkled
the blood of the bullock, came out of the most holy place, and went into the court of the
tabernacle to the altar of burnt offering, and on the north side of that slew the goat for
the sin offering, the place where all such were killed; see Lev_1:11. This was a type of
Christ, of his being slain, and made an offering for the sins of his people:
and bring his blood within the vail: it being received into a basin, as before the
blood of the bullock was, he took it, and with it went in a third time into the most holy
place:
and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle
it upon the mercy seat, and before the mercy seat; it should be rendered "toward
the mercy seat" it is by Noldius (q); See Gill on Lev_16:14.
HENRY 15-19, "When the priest had come out from the sprinkling the blood of the
bullock before the mercy-seat, 1. He must next kill the goat which was the sin-offering
for the people (Lev_16:15) and go the third time into the holy of holies, to sprinkle the
blood of the goat, as he had done that of the bullock; and thus he was to make
atonement for the holy place (Lev_16:16); that is, whereas the people by their sins had
provoked God to take away those tokens of his favourable presence with them, and
rendered even that holy place unfit to be the habitation of the holy God, atonement was
hereby made for sin, that God, being reconciled to them, might continue with them. 2.
He must then do the same for the outward part of the tabernacle that he had done for
the inner room, by sprinkling the blood of the bullock first, and then that of the goat,
without the veil, where the table and incense-altar stood, eight times each as before. The
reason intimated is because the tabernacle remained among them in the midst of their
uncleanness, Lev_16:16. God would hereby show them how much their hearts needed to
be purified, when even the tabernacle, only by standing in the midst of such an impure
and sinful people, needed this expiation; and also that even their devotions and religious
performances had much amiss in them, for which it was necessary that atonement
should be made. During this solemnity, none of the inferior priests must come into the
tabernacle (Lev_16:17), but, by standing without, must own themselves unworthy and
unfit to minister there, because their follies, and defects, and manifold impurities in
95

96. their ministry, had made this expiation of the tabernacle necessary. 3. He must then put
some of the blood, both of the bullock and of the goat mixed together, upon the horns of
the altar that is before the Lord, Lev_16:18, Lev_16:19. It is certain that the altar of
incense had this blood put upon it, for so it is expressly ordered (Exo_30:10); but some
think that this directs the high priest to the altar of burnt-offerings, for that also is here
called the altar before the Lord (Lev_16:12), because he is said to go out to it, and
because it may be presumed that that also had need of an expiation; for to that the gifts
and offerings of the children of Israel were all brought, from whose uncleanness the altar
is here said to be hallowed.
K&D 15-16, "After this he was to slay the he-goat as a sin-offering for the nation, for
which purpose, of course, he must necessarily come back to the court again, and then
take the blood of the goat into the most holy place, and do just the same with it as he had
already done with that of the ox. A double sprinkling took place in both cases, first upon
or against the capporeth, and then seven times in front of the capporeth. The first
sprinkling, which was performed once only, was for the expiation of the sins, first of the
high priest and his house, and then of the congregation of Israel (Lev_4:7, and Lev_
4:18); the second, which was repeated seven times, was for the expiation of the
sanctuary from the sins of the people. This is implied in the words of Lev_16:16, “and so
shall he make expiation for the most holy place, on account of the uncleanness of the
children of Israel, and on account of their transgressions with regard to all their sins,”
which refer to both the sacrifices; since Aaron first of all expiated the sins of the
priesthood, and the uncleanness with which the priesthood had stained the sanctuary
through their sin, by the blood of the bullock of the sin-offering; and then the sins of the
nation, and the uncleannesses with which it had defiled the sanctuary, by the he-goat,
which was also slain as a sin-offering.
(Note: V. Hoffmann's objection to this rests upon the erroneous supposition that a
double act of expiation was required for the congregation, and only a single one for
the priesthood, whereas, according to the distinct words of the text, a double
sprinkling was performed with the blood of both the sin-offerings, and therefore a
double expiation effected.)
Lev_16:16-17
“And so shall he do to the tabernacle of the congregation that dwelleth among them.”
(i.e., has its place among them, Jos_22:19) “in the midst of their uncleanness.” The holy
things were rendered unclean, not only by the sins of those who touched them, but by
the uncleanness, i.e., the bodily manifestations of the sin of the nation; so that they also
required a yearly expiation and cleansing through the expiatory blood of sacrifice. By
ohel moed, “the tabernacle of the congregation,” in Lev_16:16 and Lev_16:17, as well as
Lev_16:20 and Lev_16:33, we are to understand the holy place of the tabernacle, to
which the name of the whole is applied on account of its occupying the principal space in
the dwelling, and in distinction from kodesh (the holy), which is used in this chapter to
designate the most holy place, or the space at the back of the dwelling. It follows still
further from this, that by the altar in Lev_16:18, and also in Lev_16:20 and Lev_16:33,
which is mentioned here as the third portion of the entire sanctuary, we are to
understand the altar of burnt-offering in the court, and not the altar of incense, as the
Rabbins and most of the commentators assume. This rabbinical view cannot be
96

97. sustained, either from Exo_30:10 or from the context. Exo_30:10 simply prescribes a
yearly expiation of the altar of incense on the day of atonement; and this is implied in the
words “so shall he do,” in Lev_16:16. For these words can only mean, that in the same
way in which he had expiated the most holy place he was also to expiate the holy place of
the tabernacle, in which the altar of incense took the place of the ark of the covenant of
the most holy place; so that the expiation was performed by his putting blood, in the first
place, upon the horns of the altar, and then sprinkling it seven times upon the ground in
front of it. The expression “go out” in Lev_16:18 refers, not to his going out of the most
holy into the holy place, but to his going out of the ohel moed (or holy place) into the
court.
COFFMAN, "Verse 15
"Then shall he kill the goat of the sin-offering, that is for the people, and bring his
blood within the veil, and do with his blood as he did with the blood of the bullock,
and sprinkle it upon the mercy seat, and before the mercy-seat: and he shall make
atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel,
and because of their transgressions, even all their sins: and so shall he do for the
tent of meeting, that dwelleth with them, in the midst of their uncleanness. And
there shall be no man in the tent of meeting when he goeth in to make atonement in
the holy place, until he come out, and have made atonement for himself, and for his
household, and for all the assembly of Israel. And he shall go out unto the altar that
is before Jehovah, and make atonement for it, and shall take the blood of the
bullock, and the blood of the goat, and put it upon the horns of the altar round
about. And he shall sprinkle of the blood upon it with his finger seven times, and
cleanse it, and hallow it from the uncleannesses of the children of Israel."
The big thing in all these rituals was to make it possible for the people to have access
to God. The sins of Israel were a constant and continual impediment to this, and
even their worship tended repeatedly to contaminate with the stain of sin the very
altars and precincts of the holy tabernacle itself, hence, the need for this annual
cleansing. Certainly one of the great purposes of this sacred day was that of making
it possible for Israel's access to the knowledge and fellowship of God to continue.
Note particularly that Aaron went "alone" beyond the veil, with no human
witnesses permitted to view his actions. Christ also "trod the winepress alone"
(Isaiah 63:3). No earthly witness beheld the offering of Jesus' blood in heaven.
COKE, "Leviticus 16:15. Then shall he kill the goat of the sin-offering— Having
performed the ceremonies requisite for his own expiation and that of his family, he
was to proceed, in the same manner, to make expiation for the sins of the whole
people, whose transgressions in the foregoing year rendered their place of worship
unfit for God's habitation; and, therefore, the victim's blood was offered by the
priests, as a sign of their having forfeited their own blood or life, and as an
atonement for them, through the blood of the great Mediator. All this, as the apostle
97

98. to the Hebrews has set forth, served abundantly to shew the imperfection of the
legal dispensation; see Hebrews, chap. 10: Note; 1. Our most solemn services need
pardon; even our prayers and duties must be sprinkled with the blood of Jesus. 2.
When Jesus gave himself for us, of the people there was none with him: the work
was all his own, and to him be all the glory of it ascribed.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 15
(15) Then shall he kill the goat.—As the act of expiation for himself and for the
priesthood was thus completed by the sprinkling of the blood, the high priest again
left the Holy of Holies in the same manner as before, put the vessel on a golden stand
in the Temple, expressly prepared for this purpose, and returned to the court, to the
altar of burnt offering. On the north side of the altar he slew the goat which the lot
had destined for God, and which was the sin offering for the people. As in the case
of the bullock, which was his own sin offering, he caught the blood in the bowl, and
went within the Holy of Holies a third time. He placed himself in the same position
as before, sprinkled and counted the sprinklings in the same manner, and, on his
returning to the Holy place, put the vessel on another stand.
PETT, "Verse 15
“Then shall he kill the goat of the purification for sin offering, which is for the
people, and bring his blood within the veil, and do with his blood as he did with the
blood of the bull ox, and sprinkle it on the mercy-seat, and before the mercy-seat,”
His third entry into the Holy of Holies on that Day is after the killing of the he-goat
for a purification for sin offering on behalf of the people. He also brings that blood
within the veil and deals with it in the same way as with the blood of the bull ox.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:15. Then shall he kill the goat — He went out of the holy of
holies and killed it, and then returned thither again with its blood. And whereas the
high-priest is said to be allowed to enter into that place but once in a year, that is to
be understood of one day in a year, but there was occasion of going in and coming
out more than once upon that day.
16 In this way he will make atonement for the
Most Holy Place because of the uncleanness and
rebellion of the Israelites, whatever their sins have
been. He is to do the same for the tent of meeting,
98

99. which is among them in the midst of their
uncleanness.
BARNES, "Lev_16:16
The “holy place” - Here the place within the veil, the holy of holies.
Tabernacle of the congregation - tent of meeting. atonement was now to be made
for the tabernacle as a whole. The sense is very briefly expressed, but there seems to be
no room to doubt that the high priest was to sprinkle the blood of each of the victims
before the altar of incense, as he had done before the mercy-seat within the veil; and also
to touch with blood the horns of the altar of incense Exo_30:10.
That remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness - Compare
Lev_16:19. The most sacred earthly things which came into contact with the nature of
man needed from time to time to be cleansed and sanctified by the blood of the sin-
offerings which had been taken into the presence of Yahweh. See Exo_28:38 note.
GILL, "And he shall make an atonement for the holy place,.... Even the holy of
holies, as Aben Ezra interprets it, into which the high priest entered with blood for that
purpose; the Targum of Jonathan adds, by a verbal confession, that is, of sin; but
atonement was not made in that way, but by the blood of the bullock and goat, which
was sprinkled towards the mercy seat, above and below: and this was made
because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their
transgressions in all their sins; which heap of words shows how many and heinous
the sins of the people of Israel were, being defections from God, rebellions against him,
transgressions of his law, and which brought pollution and guilt upon them, which could
only be expiated by blood; and though the people of Israel did not enter so much as into
the holy place, where the priests at times went, and much less into the holiest of all, yet
their sins in some sense entered there, and came before the Lord that dwelt there; as the
sins of men do even reach up to heaven itself, and cry for wrath and vengeance: and so
made the Israelites unworthy of such a favour as for the Lord to dwell among them in
that most holy place, in so solemn a manner; and for their high priest to enter there, and
consult the oracle of God for them, and make intercession on their account, to which
atonement was necessary; even as men by their sins render themselves unworthy of
entering into the heavenly state, nor can they, without the atonement and sacrifice of
Christ; and to this purification of the patterns of heavenly things; and of the heavenly
things or places themselves, the apostle refers, Heb_9:23,
and shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation that remaineth among
them, in the midst of their uncleanness; that is, the court of the tabernacle where
the Israelites were admitted, and where they often came in their uncleanness, either
ignorantly or presumptuously, and yet notwithstanding the tabernacle remained among
them; but, it was necessary that atonement should be made for the uncleanness in it, and
around it, that it might continue, and they might have the privilege of coming into it, and
worshipping in it. This shows that there are sins of holy things, and which attend the
99

100. most solemn service, which are committed in the sanctuary of the Lord, and while
waiting upon him in his house and ordinances; which must be expiated and removed.
The same rites were observed, in making the atonement for this part of the sanctuary, as
for the most holy place, particularly by sprinkling the blood in like manner, only,
elsewhere; so says Jarchi, as he sprinkled of them both within, that is, of the blood of the
bullock, and of the goat, within the vail, once above, and seven times below; so he
sprinkled, by the vail without, of both of them, once above, and seven times below.
K&D, "There was to be no one in the ohel moed when Aaron went into it to make
expiation in the most holy place, until he came out (of the tabernacle) again; not because
no one but the chief servant of Jehovah was worthy to be near or present either as
spectator or assistant at this sacred act before Jehovah (Knobel), but because no unholy
person was to defile by his presence the sanctuary, which had just been cleansed; just as
no layman at all was allowed to enter the holy place, or could go with impunity into the
presence of the holy God.
CALVIN, "16.And he shall make an atonement for the holy place. The cleansing of
the sanctuary might seem absurd, as if it were in man’s power to pollute what God
Himself had consecrated; for we know that God remains true, although all’ the
world be unholy, and consequently that whatever God has appointed changes not its
nature through the sins of men. Yet, if no contagion from men’s sins had infected
the tabernacle, this cleansing would have been superfluous. But although the
sanctuary in itself may have contracted no defilement from the guilt of the people,
still, in regard to the sin and guilt of the people themselves, it is justly accounted
unclean. And thus sin is made more exceeding sinful, inasmuch as men, even though
their intention be to serve God, profane His sacred name, if they do so carelessly or
irreverently. It was at that time a detestable sacrilege in all to defile the altar and
sanctuary of God; and Moses convicts the Israelites of this sacrilege when He
commands the sanctuary to be cleansed. Moreover, let us learn that men may so
contaminate the sacred things of God as that their nature should still remain
unaltered and their dignity inviolate. Wherefore Moses expressly states that the
sanctuary is cleansed not from its own uncleanness, but from that of the children of
Israel. We must now apply the substance of this type to our own use. By Baptism
and the Lord’s Supper, God appears to us in his only-begotten Son: these are the
pledges of our holiness; yet such is our corruption that we never cease from
profaning, as far as in us lies, these instruments of the Spirit whereby God sanctifies
us. Since, however, we have now no victims to kill, we must mourn and humbly pray
that Christ, by the sprinkling of His blood, may blot out and cleanse these
defilements of ours, by which Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are polluted. The
reason of the purification is also to be observed, viz., because the tabernacle
“dwelleth among them in the midst of their uncleanness;” (247) by which words
Moses signifies that men are so polluted and full of corruptions that they
contaminate all that is holy without the intervention of a means of purification; for
he takes it for granted that men cannot but bring some impurity with them. What
he had said of the inner sanctuary he extends to the altar and the whole of the
100

101. tabernacle.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 16
(16) Make an atonement for the holy place.—The transgressions of the Israelites
during the year not only defiled them, but also drew defilement upon the very
sanctuary with its utensils, which was pitched in the midst of them. For this purpose
the high priest during the second Temple thoroughly mixed the blood of the bullock
with that of the goat, and went out into the Holy place which he inspected first.
And so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation.—Better, and so shall he
do for the tent of meeting. He next cleansed by the same process the tent of meeting,
or the court of the sanctuary, where the Israelites were usually admitted; that is, the
high priest sprinkled the court and the altar of burnt offering which was in it eight
times with the mingled blood of the bullock and goat.
PETT, "Verse 16
“And he shall make atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleannesses of
the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions, even all their sins, and so
shall he do for the tent of meeting, which dwells with them in the midst of their
uncleannesses.”
And the purpose of all this is to make atonement for the holy place because it has
been polluted by the uncleannesses of the children of Israel (as depicted in the
previous five chapters) and also because of their transgressions and their sins
revealed by consideration of the Law, both evil doings and evil thoughts. Thus on
this day is the pollution removed from the holy tent of meeting which is dwelling
with them in their uncleannesses.
This special Day above all days is in order to allow the dwellingplace of God to be
able to still continue to dwell among them, by dealing with all their uncleannesses
and their sins which have affected it. The holiness of God is such that even with all
the precautions for the prevention of the defilement of that holy place, they have not
been enough. But on this Day He will remedy that by these ceremonies, despatching
the uncleannesses and the sins into the far off wilderness. It is because this will be
done on the Day of Atonement that He can deal so lightly with their uncleannesses
during the year.
But these were all but shadows until He should come Who would in Himself fulfil all
this and more, making a way open for ever into the full presence of God for all who
are in Him. He would enter but once and remain there for ever, for His sacrifice was
eternally complete, and nothing else remained to be done. It was a completed and
eternal work.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:16. Because of the uncleanness of Israel — For though the
101

102. people did not enter into that place, yet their sins entered thither, and would have
hindered the effects of the high-priest’s mediation on their behalf, if God had not
been reconciled to them. In the midst of their uncleanness — In the midst of a sinful
people, who defile not themselves only, but also God’s sanctuary. And God hereby
showed them how much their hearts needed to be purified, when even the
tabernacle, only by standing in the midst of them, needed this expiation.
WHEDON, " 16. Atonement for the holy place — The holy of holies is viewed as
polluted by the impurities of the people and by the imperfect priesthood, and
therefore it needs the cleansing blood of sprinkling.
Uncleanness — Not depravity or inbred sin, but ceremonial impurity.
Transgressions — Actual sins entailing guilt were not pardoned but passed over.
Romans 3:25, margin. “The great annual ceremonies of expiation, though powerless
to remove spiritual uncleanness, and securing no actual pardon, had this effect, that
every man was free to enter the tabernacle and appeal to the divine mercy. They
removed whatever external hinderances might have otherwise excluded the sinful
nation from the external service of God. They sanctified “to the purifying of the
flesh.” — Dall. See Hebrews 9:13.
The tabernacle of the congregation — The priests’ apartment without the vail. The
manner of its purification may be inferred from Leviticus 4:6-7. See note.
Remaineth — Dwells.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:16 And he shall make an atonement for the holy [place],
because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their
transgressions in all their sins: and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the
congregation, that remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness.
Ver. 16. In the midst of their uncleanness.] Which did cleave to the tabernacle, as
the sins of spiritual Babylon are said to be glued ( εκολληθησαν) to heaven.
[Revelation 18:5]
PULPIT, "The two sprinklings, first with the bullock's blood, then with the goat's
blood, on the front of the ark and on the ground before it, effected the symbolical
atonement which was required annually even for the holy of holies because it was
pitched in the midst of sinful men. There remained the outer chamber of the
tabernacle and the altar of burnt sacrifice to be atoned for. Accordingly, the high
priest proceeds to do so for the tabernacle of the congregation, that is, to make a
similar atonement by similar means outside the vail as he had made inside it. He
would therefore have made one sprinkling with the blood upon the vail, and seven
sprinklings before it, after which he placed the blood upon the horns of the altar of
incense, according to the command given in Exodus 30:10. In later times it became
customary also to sprinkle the top of the altar of incense seven times.
102

103. 17 No one is to be in the tent of meeting from the
time Aaron goes in to make atonement in the
Most Holy Place until he comes out, having made
atonement for himself, his household and the
whole community of Israel.
GILL, "And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation,....
Not any of the priests, as Aben Ezra, no, not in the holy place where they ministered, nor
in the court of the tabernacle, nor in any of the courts, nor indeed any of the people: all
places were cleared
when he, the high priest:
goeth in to make an atonement in the holy place until he come out; this in the
mystery of it was to signify, that atonement for sin is made only by Christ our high
priest; he himself, and no other, bore our sins, and he himself purged them away, or by
his sacrifice alone expiated them; his own arm wrought salvation, and of the people
there were none with him to help and assist him; when he the Shepherd was smitten by
the sword of justice, the sheep were scattered, all his disciples forsook him and fled;
there were none to appear for him, or stand by him, or in the least to lend an assisting
hand in the great work in which he was engaged; he is the only Mediator, between God
and man, both of redemption and of intercession; he is the alone Saviour, to him only
are sinners to look for salvation, and he is to have all the glory; he had no partner in the
work, and he will have no rival in the honour of it:
and have made an atonement for himself, and for his household; his whole
family, and all the priests, by the bullock of his sin offering, as Aben Ezra observes, and
by carrying in the blood of it within the vail, and sprinkling it there:
and for all the congregation of Israel; by the goat of their sin offering, as the same
writer notes, and doing with the blood of that as with the blood of the bullock; all typical
of the atonement of Christ for his mystical self the church; for the whole family and
household of God; for the general assembly and church of the firstborn, whose names
are written in heaven.
103

104. CALVIN, "17.And there shall be no man. The driving away of all men from
approaching the tabernacle during the act of atonement is a sort of punishment by
temporary banishment, that they may perceive themselves to be driven from God’s
face, whilst the place is purified which had been defiled by their sins. This was a
melancholy sight, when all these for whose sake it was erected were obliged to desert
it; but in this way they were reminded that every part and particle of our salvation
depends on God’s mercy only, when they saw themselves excluded from the remedy
designed for obtaining pardon, unless a new pardon should come to their aid, since
they had fallen away from the hope of reconciliation.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 17
(17) And there shall be no man.—Whilst the high priest was performing this process
of cleansing, no one, whether priest or Israelite, was permitted to be present, thus
precluding the possibility of anyone being within the precincts who had unwittingly
contracted defilement. The fact that the high priest was thus alone in the sanctuary,
with no one to see how he conducted the ritual, gave rise to the practice of his being
sworn, on the eve of the Day of Atonement, by the chief priests and the elders of the
Sanhedrin that he would make no change whatever in the traditional ceremonies of
the day, as follows :—“We adjure thee, by Him who hath caused His name to dwell
in this house, that thou shalt not alter anything of all that we do say unto thee.” This
had especial reference to the points at issue between the Pharisees and Sadducees, as
some of the high priests held the Sadducaic views. (See Leviticus 16:2.)
PETT, "Verse 17
“And there shall be no man in the tent of meeting when he goes in to make
atonement in the holy place, until he come out, and have made atonement for
himself, and for his household, and for all the assembly of Israel.”
And while all this was going on there was to be no one else in the tent of meeting.
Throughout the whole process the High Priest was to act alone. Purified, atoned for,
clothed in holy white garments, he alone was in a state to enter the tabernacle at this
crucial time. Humanly speaking the task was his from start to finish. No other could
take part. None could enter the sanctuary until atonement had been made for the
Priest himself, for the other priests, for all his household, and for all the assembly of
Israel.
This is a reminder to us that Christ’s great work of atonement was also wrought by
Him and by Him alone. No other was worthy to take part, nor could. The work was
His and His alone. No priest, nor any other, could have any part in it. The work was
total and complete.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:17. There shall be no man in the tabernacle — In the holy
place, where the priests and Levites were at other times. This was commanded for
104

105. the greater reverence to the divine majesty, then in a more special manner
appearing, and that none of them might cast an eye into the holy of holies, as the
high-priest went in or came out.
WHEDON, " 17. There shall be no man in the tabernacle — The entire tabernacle
must be vacant. The priests must leave their place and mingle with the Levites on
guard around the sacred abode of Jehovah. The penitent people stand in silence and
awe while their solitary representative, with trembling, approaches the presence of
the holy God. How strikingly this prefigures the fact that there is but one Mediator,
the man Jesus Christ. He must ever be solitary in his office. No virgin mother, no
saint, no angel can be associated with him in making his atonement and in pleading
its merits on high. To thrust an imaginary associate into the office of Intercessor,
where Jesus stands alone, is to degrade and vilify him. Hebrews 1:3; Hebrews 9:7.
See concluding note, (6.)
For all the congregation — Every penitent Israelite had a share in the benefits of
that atonement, as every penitent believer in Jesus Christ receives pardoning grace
through his atoning blood. The conditional repentance, though not expressed, is
evidently implied; for the notion that the mere mechanical performance of the high
priest, irrespective of the state of heart of the sinner, resulted in a reconciliation, is
even in the Talmud itself mentioned only to be forthwith rejected. The universality
of the atonement is here clearly fore-shadowed.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:17 And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the
congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement in the holy [place], until he
come out, and have made an atonement for himself, and for his household, and for
all the congregation of Israel.
Ver. 17. And there shall be no man.] Christ will have no partner, and he needs no
assistant. [Hebrews 7:25 Isaiah 63:3]
PULPIT, "There shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation. From the
first entry until the work of atonement was completed, both for the holy of holies
and for the tabernacle, no one but the high priest was to be allowed within the door
of the tabernacle, not only that there might be no witness of the withdrawal of the
awful vail, but also that the rite of purification might not be interfered with by an
impure presence. Even on the Day of Atonement the dwelling-place of God, typical
of heaven, was closed to the eye and foot of man, "the way into the holiest of all
being not yet made manifest" (Hebrews 9:8), until the Divine High Priest opened the
way for his people by his own entrance.
105

106. 18 “Then he shall come out to the altar that is
before the Lord and make atonement for it. He
shall take some of the bull’s blood and some of the
goat’s blood and put it on all the horns of the
altar.
BARNES, "Lev_16:18
The order of the ceremony required that atonement should first be made for the most
holy place with the mercy-seat, then for the holy place with the golden altar, and then for
the altar in the court. See Lev_16:20, Lev_16:33. The horns of the brazen altar were
touched with the blood, as they were in the ordinary sin-offerings. Lev_4:25, Lev_4:30,
Lev_4:34.
Of the blood of the bullock, and of the blood of the goat - Some of the blood of
the two victims was mingled together in a basin.
GILL, "And he shall go out unto the altar that is before the Lord,.... The
golden altar, the altar of incense, which stood in the holy place without the vail, over
against the most holy place, where Jehovah dwelt, and so is said to be before him; of this
altar the Misnah (r) understands it, and so do Jarchi and Ben Gersom; and, according to
Exo_30:10; once a year Aaron was to make an atonement on the horns of it, with the
blood of the sin offering, which plainly refers to this time, the day of atonement; but
Aben Ezra is of opinion, that the altar of burnt offering is meant; and Bishop Patrick is
inclined to think so too, because he supposes the high priest's going out signifies his
coming from the sanctuary, where the golden altar was, and which had been cleansed,
Lev_16:16; and because, if the altar of burnt offering is not here meant, no care seems to
be taken of its cleansing; but it should be observed, that the holy place, Lev_16:16,
means the holy of holies, and not the holy place where the altar of incense stood; and
that the altar of burnt offering was atoned for and cleansed, when the tabernacle of the
congregation was, in which it stood, and from which, this altar is manifestly
distinguished, Lev_16:20; wherefore the reason given for the altar of burnt offering
holds good for the altar of incense, since if that is not intended, no care is taken about it;
add to this, that the last account of the high priest was, that he was in the most holy
place, and not the holy place, Lev_16:17; out of which he now came into the holy place,
where the altar of incense was:
and make an atonement for it; where incense was daily offered up, signifying the
prayers of the saints, which having many failings and imperfections in them, yea, many
sins and transgressions attending them, need atonement by the blood of Christ, of which
this was a type:
and shall take of the blood of the bullock, and of the blood of the goat; mixed,
as the Targum of Jonathan paraphrases it; and so Jarchi asks, what is the atonement of
106

107. it? he takes the blood of the bullock, and the blood of the goat, and mixes them together:
the account given of this affair in the Misnah (s) is; he poured the blood of the bullock
into the blood of the goat, and then put a full basin into an empty one, that it might be
well mixed together: and having so done, he did as follows:
and put it upon the horns of the altar round about; upon the four horns which
were around it; and it is asked in the Misnah (t), where did he begin? at the northeast
horn, and so to the northwest, and then to the southwest, and (ended) at the southeast;
at the place where he began with the sin offering on the outward altar, there he finished
on the inward altar, and as he went along he put the blood on each horn, which was the
atonement for the altar.
K&D 18-19, "After he had made atonement for the dwelling, Aaron was to expiate the
altar in the court, by first of all putting some of the blood of the bullock and he-goat
upon the horns of the altar, and then sprinkling it seven times with his finger, and thus
cleansing and sanctifying it from the uncleannesses of the children of Israel. The
application of blood to the horns of the altar was intended to expiate the sins of the
priests as well as those of the nation; just as in the case of ordinary sin-offerings it
expiated the sins of individual members of the nation (Lev_4:25, Lev_4:30, Lev_4:34),
to which the priests also belonged; and the sevenfold sprinkling effected the purification
of the place of sacrifice from the uncleannesses of the congregation.
The meaning of the sprinkling of blood upon the capporeth and the horns of the two
altars was the same as in the case of every sin-offering. The peculiar features in the
expiatory ritual of the day of atonement were the following. In the first place, the blood
of both sacrifices was taken not merely into the holy place, but into the most holy, and
sprinkled directly upon the throne of God. This was done to show that the true
atonement could only take place before the throne of God Himself, and that the sinner
was only then truly reconciled to God, and placed in the full and living fellowship of
peace with God, when he could come directly to the throne of God, and not merely to the
place where, although the Lord indeed manifested His grace to him, He was still
separated from him by a curtain. In this respect, therefore, the bringing of the blood of
atonement into the most holy place had a prophetic signification, and was a predictive
sign that the curtain, which then separated Israel from its God, would one day be
removed, and that with the entrance of the full and eternal atonement free access would
be opened to the throne of the Lord. The second peculiarity in this act of atonement was
the sprinkling of the blood seven times upon the holy places, the floor of the holy of
holies and holy place, and the altar of the court; also the application of blood to the
media of atonement in the three divisions of the tabernacle, for the cleansing of the holy
places from the uncleanness of the children of Israel. As this uncleanness cannot be
regarded as consisting of physical defilement, but simply as the ideal effluence of their
sins, which had been transferred to the objects in question; so, on the other hand, the
cleansing of the holy places can only be understood as consisting in an ideal transference
of the influence of the atoning blood to the inanimate objects which had been defiled by
sin. If the way in which the sacrificial blood, regarded as the expiation of souls, produced
its cleansing effects was, that by virtue thereof the sin was covered over, whilst the
sinner was reconciled to God and received forgiveness of sin and the means of
sanctification, we must regard the sin-destroying virtue of the blood as working in the
same way also upon the objects defiled by sin, namely, that powers were transferred to
107

108. them which removed the effects proceeding from sin, and in this way wiped out the
uncleanness of the children of Israel that was in them. This communication of purifying
powers to the holy things was represented by the sprinkling of the atoning blood upon
and against them, and indeed by their being sprinkled seven times, to set forth the
communication as raised to an efficiency corresponding to its purpose, and to impress
upon it the stamp of a divine act through the number seven, which was sanctified by the
work of God in creation.
ELLICOTT, "(18) And he shall go out unto the altar.—The authorities during the
second Temple took this to denote the golden altar, or the altar of incense which
stood in the Holy place over against the Holy of Holies, as this was the altar for
which expiation was made once a year on this day (see Exodus 30:10); hence it was
cleansed next. Beginning at the north-eastern corner, the high priest then went to
the north-western, then the south-western, and last round to the south-eastern
corner.
PETT, "Verse 18
“And he shall go out to the altar that is before Yahweh, and make atonement for it,
and shall take of the blood of the bull ox, and of the blood of the goat, and put it on
the horns of the altar round about.”
After the presentations of blood in the Holy of Holies, ‘the altar that is before
Yahweh’ was to be atoned for. The blood of both bull ox and goat was to be put on
its four horns. There is divided opinion on whether this unique description refers to
the golden altar of incense or the altar of burnt offerings. The phrase would have
been clear at the time (see Leviticus 4:6-7; Leviticus 4:17; Exodus 30:8). In view of
the fact that the purpose here is of the purification of the whole sanctuary, and the
work was being done by the High Priest alone with no other present, some argue
that it was the golden altar of incense. Others argue equally that it was the altar of
burnt offering which in its own way was ‘before Yahweh’ (compare Leviticus 1:3),
for it stood in the court before the entrance to the tabernacle. But Israel then would
have known what the description referred to. Some would see Leviticus 16:20 as
pointing to the altar of burnt offering.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:18. The altar before the Lord — That is, the altar of
incense, where the blood of sacrifices was to be put, particularly the blood of the sin-
offerings offered upon this day of atonement, and which is most properly said to be
before the Lord; that is, before the place where God in a special manner dwelt. His
going out relates to the holy of holies, into which he was said to go in, Leviticus
16:17.
WHEDON, "18. Blood… horns of the altar — The horns of the incense-altar
symbolized the divine favour and mercy. The annual application of the blood
renewed the expression of that favour when forfeited by Israel’s sin. Some suppose
108

109. that the altar of burnt offerings is referred to, and that the purification of the
incense altar is implied in that of the holy place, Leviticus 16:16. See Leviticus 4:7,
note.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:18 And he shall go out unto the altar that [is] before the
LORD, and make an atonement for it; and shall take of the blood of the bullock,
and of the blood of the goat, and put [it] upon the horns of the altar round about.
Ver. 18. And he shall go out unto the altar.] This signified, saith one, that every
church assembly is acceptable to God, only through the blood of Christ, by the
remission of all their sins.
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:18, Leviticus 16:19
The holy of holies and the outer chamber of the tabernacle having been reconciled,
the high priest shall go out unto the altar that is before the Lord—that is, the altar
of burnt sacrifice in the court, standing in front of the tabernacle, not the altar of
incense, as has been supposed by some—and shall take of the blood of the bullock,
and of the blood of the goat and put it upon the horns of the altar round about. And
he shall sprinkle of the blood upon it with his finger seven times. This completes the
ceremony of "making an atonement for the holy sanctuary, and making an
atonement for the tabernacle of the congregation, and for the altar" (Leviticus
16:33.)
19 He shall sprinkle some of the blood on it with
his finger seven times to cleanse it and to
consecrate it from the uncleanness of the
Israelites.
GILL, "And he shall sprinkle of the blood upon it with his finger seven
times,.... This was done with his right finger, or forefinger, as the Targum of Jonathan,
and seven times, to denote the perfect cleansing of the altar with it. Jarchi observes, that
after he, the high priest, had put the puttings (of blood) upon the horns of it, he
sprinkled of it seven sprinklings on the top of it: the Misnah says (u), upon the pure
place of it, that is, upon a place of it, from whence the coals and ashes were removed,
109

110. and where the gold appeared:
and cleanse it, and hallow it from the uncleanness of the children of Israel;
by sprinkling the blood upon it; Jarchi's note is, "and cleanse it" from what was past,
"and hallow it" for time to come.
ELLICOTT, "(19) And he shall sprinkle.—He then sprinkled with his right finger,
seven times, the middle or top of the altar, the coals and ashes having been
previously removed so effectually, that the gold appeared. The remainder of the
blood he poured out at the western and south-eastern side of the altar, where a
drain communicated with the Kidron, whither it was conducted by a pipe.
PETT, "Verse 19
“And he shall sprinkle of the blood on it with his finger seven times, and cleanse it,
and hallow it from the uncleannesses of the children of Israel.”
Then the blood of both sacrifices will be sprinkled on the altar with the High
Priest’s finger ‘seven times’ in order to indicate complete cleansing. The purpose is
in order to ‘make it holy’, re-separating it off to God from all uncleanness, by
removing all traces of the uncleannesses of the children of Israel (compare Leviticus
4:6-7; Leviticus 8:11).
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:19 And he shall sprinkle of the blood upon it with his finger
seven times, and cleanse it, and hallow it from the uncleanness of the children of
Israel.
Ver. 19. From the uncleanness,] i.e., The defects and imperfections of their holiest
performances.
20 “When Aaron has finished making atonement
for the Most Holy Place, the tent of meeting and
the altar, he shall bring forward the live goat.
GILL, "And when he hath made an end of reconciling the holy place,.... That
is, the holy of holies, by carrying in the blood of the bullock, and of the goat there, and
110

111. sprinkling them as before observed:
and the tabernacle of the congregation; the great court where the people met, and
where the altar of burnt offering stood:
and the altar; the altar of incense in the holy place; and so all the parts of the
tabernacle were reconciled and atoned for, even the holy of holies, the holy place, and
the court of the people: all the work the day of atonement, we are told (w), was done
according to the order prescribed, and that if anything was done before another, it was
doing nothing: thus, for instance, if the blood of the goat went before (or was sprinkled
before) the blood of the bullock, he must return and sprinkle of the blood of the goat
after the blood of the bullock; and if before he has finished the puttings (of the blood)
within, the blood is poured out, (that is, at the bottom of the altar of burnt offering,) he
shall bring other blood, and return and sprinkle anew within, and so in the temple, and
at the golden altar, for every atonement is by itself:
he shall bring the live goat; that which remained alive after the other was slain, as it
was to do, according to the lot that fell upon it, Lev_16:10; this was brought to the door
of the tabernacle of the congregation, whither the high priest went, and performed the
following rites.
HENRY 20-28, "The high priest having presented unto the Lord the expiatory
sacrifices, by the sprinkling of their blood, the remainder of which, it is probable, he
poured out at the foot of the brazen altar, 1. He is next to confess the sins of Israel, with
both his hands upon the head of the scape-goat (Lev_16:20, Lev_16:21); and whenever
hands were imposed upon the head of any sacrifice it was always done with confession,
according as the nature of the sacrifice was; and, this being a sin-offering, it must be a
confession of sin. In the latter and more degenerate ages of the Jewish church they had a
set form of confession prepared for the high priest, but God here prescribed none; for it
might be supposed that the high priest was so well acquainted with the state of the
people, and had such a tender concern for them, that he needed not any form. The
confession must be as particular as he could make it, not only of all the iniquities of the
children of Israel, but all their transgressions in all their sins. In one sin there may be
many transgressions, from the several aggravating circumstances of it; and in our
confessions we should take notice of them, and not only say, I have sinned, but, with
Achan, “Thus and thus have I done.” By this confession he must put the sins of Israel
upon the head of the goat; that is, exercising faith upon the divine appointment which
constituted such a translation, he must transfer the punishment incurred from the
sinners to the sacrifice, which would have been but a jest, nay, an affront to God, if he
himself had not ordained it. 2. The goat was then to be sent away immediately by the
hand of a fit person pitched upon for the purpose, into a wilderness, a land not
inhabited; and God allowed them to make this construction of it, that the sending away
of the goat was the sending away of their sins, by a free and full remission: He shall bear
upon him all their iniquities, Lev_16:22. The losing of the goat was a sign to them that
the sins of Israel should be sought for, and not found, Jer_50:20. The later Jews had a
custom to tie one shred of scarlet cloth to the horns of the goat and another to the gate of
the temple, or to the top of the rock where the goat was lost, and they concluded that if it
turned white, as they say it usually did, the sins of Israel were forgiven, as it is written,
111

112. Though your sins have been as scarlet, they shall be as wool: and they add that for forty
years before the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans the scarlet cloth never changed
colour at all, which is a fair confession that, having rejected the substance, the shadow
stood them in no stead. 3. The high priest must then put off his linen garments in the
tabernacle, and leave them there, the Jews say never to be worn again by himself or any
other, for they made new ones every year; and he must bathe himself in water, put on his
rich clothes, and then offer both his own and the people's burnt-offerings, Lev_16:23,
Lev_16:24. When we have the comfort of our pardon God must have the glory of it. If we
have the benefit of the sacrifice of atonement, we must not grudge the sacrifices of
acknowledgment. And, it should seem, the burning of the fat of the sin-offering was
deferred till now (Lev_16:25), that it might be consumed with the burnt-offerings. 4.
The flesh of both those sin-offerings whose blood was taken within the veil was to be all
burnt, not upon the altar, but at a distance without the camp, to signify both our putting
away sin by true repentance, and the spirit of burning, and God's putting it away by a full
remission, so that it shall never rise up in judgment against us. 5. He that took the scape-
goat into the wilderness, and those that burned the sin-offering, were to be looked upon
as ceremonially unclean, and must not come into the camp till they had washed their
clothes and bathed their flesh in water, which signified the defiling nature of sin; even
the sacrifice which was but made sin was defiling: also the imperfection of the legal
sacrifices; they were so far from taking away sin that even they left some stain upon
those that touched them. 6. When all this was done, the high priest went again into the
most holy place to fetch his censer, and so returned to his own house with joy, because
he had done his duty, and died not.
JAMISON 20-22, "he shall bring the live goat — Having already been presented
before the Lord (Lev_16:10), it was now brought forward to the high priest, who, placing
his hands upon its head, and “having confessed over it all the iniquities of the people of
Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins,” transferred them by this act to the
goat as their substitute. It was then delivered into the hands of a person, who was
appointed to lead him away into a distant, solitary, and desert place, where in early times
he was let go, to escape for his life; but in the time of Christ, he was carried to a high rock
twelve miles from Jerusalem, and there, being thrust over the precipice, he was killed.
Commentators have differed widely in their opinions about the character and purpose of
this part of the ceremonial; some considering the word “Azazel,” with the Septuagint
and our translators, to mean, “the scapegoat”; others, “a lofty, precipitous rock”
[Bochart]; others, “a thing separated to God” [Ewald, Tholuck]; while others think it
designates Satan [Gesenius, Hengstenberg]. This last view is grounded on the idea of
both goats forming one and the same sacrifice of atonement, and it is supported by Zec_
3:1-10, which presents a striking commentary on this passage. Whether there was in this
peculiar ceremony any reference to an Egyptian superstition about Typhon, the spirit of
evil, inhabiting the wilderness, and the design was to ridicule it by sending a cursed
animal into his gloomy dominions, it is impossible to say. The subject is involved in
much obscurity. But in any view there seems to be a typical reference to Christ who bore
away our sins [Heb_10:4; 1Jo_3:5].
K&D 20-22, "After the completion of the expiation and cleansing of the holy things,
112

113. Aaron was to bring up the live goat, i.e., to have it brought before the altar of burnt-
offering, and placing both his hands upon its head, to confess all the sins and
transgressions of the children of Israel upon it, and so put them upon its head. He was
then to send the goat away into the desert by a man who was standing ready, that it
might carry all its sins upon it into a land cut off; and there the man was to set the goat
at liberty. ‫י‬ ִ‫תּ‬ ִ‫,ע‬ ἁπάξ λεγ. from ‫ת‬ֵ‫ע‬ an appointed time, signifies opportune, present at the
right time, or ready. ‫ה‬ ָ‫ֵר‬‫ז‬ְ‫,גּ‬ which is also met with in this passage alone, from ‫ַר‬‫ז‬ָ‫גּ‬ to cut,
or cut off, that which is severed, a country cut off from others, not connected by roads
with any inhabited land. “The goat was not to find its way back” (Knobel). To understand
clearly the meaning of this symbolical rite, we must start from the fact, that according to
the distinct words of Lev_16:5, the two goats were to serve as a sin-offering (‫את‬ ָ‫טּ‬ ַ‫ח‬ ְ‫.)ל‬
They were both of them devoted, therefore, to one and the same purpose, as was pointed
out by the Talmudists, who laid down the law on that very account, that they were to be
exactly alike, colore, statura, et valore. The living goat, therefore, is not to be regarded
merely as the bearer of the sin to be taken away, but as quite as truly a sin-offering as the
one that was slaughtered. It was appointed ‫יו‬ָ‫ל‬ָ‫ע‬ ‫ר‬ֵ‫פּ‬ ַ‫כ‬ ְ‫ל‬ (Lev_16:10), i.e., not that an
expiatory rite might be performed over it, for ‫ל‬ַ‫ע‬ with ‫ר‬ֵ‫פּ‬ַ‫כּ‬ always applies to the object of
the expiation, but properly to expiate it, i.e., to make it the object of the expiation, or
make expiation with it. To this end the sins of the nation were confessed upon it with the
laying on of hands, and thus symbolically laid upon its head, that it might bear them,
and when sent into the desert carry them away thither. The sins, which were thus laid
upon its head by confession, were the sins of Israel, which had already been expiated by
the sacrifice of the other goat. To understand, however, how the sins already expiated
could still be confessed and laid upon the living goat, it is not sufficient to say, with Bähr,
that the expiation with blood represented merely a covering or covering up of the sin,
and that in order to impress upon the expiation the stamp of the greatest possible
completeness and perfection, a supplement was appended, which represented the
carrying away and removal of the sin. For in the case of every sin-offering for the
congregation, in addition to the covering or forgiveness of sin represented by the
sprinkling of blood, the removal or abolition of it was also represented by the burning of
the flesh of the sacrifice; and this took place in the present instance also. As both goats
were intended for a sin-offering, the sins of the nation were confessed upon both, and
placed upon the heads of both by the laying on of hands; though it is of the living goat
only that this is expressly recorded, being omitted in the case of the other, because the
rule laid down in Lev_4:4. was followed.
(Note: The distinction, that in the case of all the other sacrifices the (one) hand is
ordered to be laid upon the victim, whilst here both hands are ordered to be laid
upon the goat, does not constitute an essential difference, as Hoffmann supposes;
but the laying on of both hands rendered the act more solemn and expressive, in
harmony with the solemnity of the whole proceeding.)
By both Israel was delivered from all sins and transgressions; but by the one, upon
which the lot “for Jehovah” fell, it was so with regard to Jehovah; by the other, upon
which the lot “for Azazel” fell, with regard to Azazel. With regard to Jehovah, or in
relation to Jehovah, the sins were wiped away by the sacrifice of the goat; the sprinkling
of the blood setting forth their forgiveness, and the burning of the animal the blotting of
them out; and with this the separation of the congregation from Jehovah because of its
sin was removed, and living fellowship with God restored. But Israel had also been
113

114. brought by its sin into a distinct relation to Azazel, the head of the evil spirits; and it was
necessary that this should be brought to an end, if reconciliation with God was to be
perfectly secured. This complete deliverance from sin and its author was symbolized in
the leading away of the goat, which had been laden with the sins, into the desert. This
goat was to take back the sins, which God had forgiven to His congregation, into the
desert to Azazel, the father of all sin, in the one hand as a proof that his evil influences
upon men would be of no avail in the case of those who had received expiation from
God, and on the other hand as a proof to the congregation also that those who were
laden with sin could not remain in the kingdom of God, but would be banished to the
abode of evil spirits, unless they were redeemed therefrom. This last point, it is true, is
not expressly mentioned in the test; but it is evident from the fate which necessarily
awaited the goat, when driven into the wilderness in the “land cut off.” It would be sure
to perish out there in the desert, that is to say, to suffer just what a winner would have to
endure if his sins remained upon him; though probably it is only a later addition, not
founded in the law, which we find in the Mishnah, Joma vi. 6, viz., that the goat was
driven headlong from a rock in the desert, and dashed to pieces at the foot. There is not
the slightest idea of presenting a sacrifice to Azazel. This goat was a sin-offering, only so
far as it was laden with the sins of the people to carry them away into the desert; and in
this respect alone is there a resemblance between the two goats and the two birds used
in the purification of the leper (Lev_14:4.), of which the one to be set free was bathed in
the blood of the one that was killed. In both cases the reason for making use of two
animals is to be found purely in the physical impossibility of combining all the features,
that had to be set forth in the sin-offering, in one single animal.
CALVIN, "20.And when he hath made an end of reconciling. The mode of expiation
with the other goat is now more clearly explained, viz., that it should be placed
before God, and that the priest should lay his hands on its head, and confess the sins
of the people, so that he may throw the curse on the goat itself. This, as I have said,
was the only bloodless ( ἀναίματον) sacrifice; yet it is expressly called an “offering,”
(248) with reference, however, to the slaying of the former goat, and was, therefore,
as to its efficacy for propitiation, by no means to be separated from it. It was by no
means reasonable that an innocent animal should be substituted in the place of men,
to be exposed to the curse of God, except that believers might learn that they were in
no wise competent to bear His judgment, nor could be delivered from it otherwise
than by the transfer of their guilt and crime. For, since men feel that they are
altogether overwhelmed by the wrath of God, which impends over them all, they
vainly endeavor to lighten or shake off in various ways this intolerable burden; for
no absolution is to be hoped for save by the interposition of a satisfaction; and it is
not lawful to obtrude this according to man’s fancy, or, in their foolish arrogance, to
seek in themselves for the price whereby their sins may be compensated for.
Another means, therefore, of making atonement to God was revealed when Christ,
“being made a curse for us,” transferred to Himself the sins which alienated men
from God. (2 Corinthians 5:19; Galatians 3:13.) The confession tended to humiliate
the people, and thus acted as a stimulus to sincere repentance; since “the sacrifices
of God are a broken spirit,” (Psalms 51:17;) nor is it fit that any but the prostrate
should be lifted up by God’s mercy, nor that any but those who voluntarily
114

115. condemn themselves should be absolved. The accumulation of words tends to this,
“all the iniquities, all their transgressions, all their sins,” that believers may not
lightly only and as, a mere act of duty acknowledge themselves guilty before God,
but rather that they should groan under the weight, of their guilt. Since now in
Christ no special day in the year is prescribed in which the Church should confess
its sins in a solemn ceremony, let believers learn, whenever they meet together in
God’s name, humbly to submit themselves to voluntary self-condemnation, and to
pray for pardon, as if the Spirit of God dictated a formulary for them; and so let
each in private: conform himself to this rule.
COFFMAN, "Verse 20
"And when he hath made an end of atoning for the holy place, and the tent of
meeting, and the altar, he shall present the live goat: and Aaron shall lay both his
hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the
children of Israel, and all their transgressions, even all their sins; and he shall put
them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a man that
is in readiness into the wilderness: and the goat shall bear upon him all their
iniquities unto a solitary land: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness."
"He shall present the live goat ..." To whom was this goat presented? To some
wilderness demon, or to the Devil himself?. Who could believe it? The preposterous
suggestion of Micklem that, "The goat for Azazel may therefore represent a
concession to popular demands"[24] is simply incompatible, in our opinion, with a
CHRISTIAN view of this passage. It would require us to believe that some of the
most vital and typical representations of Jesus Christ in these Day of Atonement
rituals were due to the superstitious and rebellious demands of the Jews for Moses
to recognize their fool notions about demons in the ordering of these sacred
ceremonies! That cannot be the way in which these regulations were made.
Another common error in understanding the nature of atonement provided by these
rites is seen in such declarations as this:
"All the sins that had not been dealt with through the regular and occasional
sacrifices throughout the year, were confessed and atoned for on the Day of
Atonement, so that a right relationship with God might be maintained by the people
of Israel."[25]
However, it was not merely the sins committed since their last sacrifice that required
atonement - it was all of their sins. There is a triple reference in Leviticus 16:16 to
all, even ALL the sins of Israel which Aaron confessed on the head of the goat, and
again in Leviticus 16:21, the same triple emphasis on ALL Israel's sins is repeated.
This is what the N.T. referred to in the statement that, "There is a remembrance
made of sins year by year" (Hebrews 10:3), and the reason for this was emphatically
stated in the very next clause. Why? "It is impossible that the blood of bulls and
goats should take away sin." There was, of course, a type of forgiveness here, but it
115

116. was actually a "passing over" of the sins done aforetime (Romans 3:25). No sin was
ever finally disposed of and forgiven until the death of CHRIST on Calvary. There
was even on this very Day of Atonement a proof that sins were NOT terminally
forgiven. After the blood had been sprinkled upon the mercy-seat in the supreme act
of the atonement itself, Aaron promptly came out and confessed upon the goat's
head all of the sins that were the object of the atonement just made. People who find
free and total forgiveness of sins in the O.T. are simply finding something that is not
there. Yes, there are some marvelous statements that seem to say the opposite, but
all of them are directed to what God would still accomplish IN THE FUTURE, and
not to something ALREADY achieved. If true forgiveness for mankind had been
possible under Moses' law, Christ would not have been needed at all! (See Galatians
3:21-25). It was what the law "could not do" that Christ came to do.
ELLICOTT, "(20) And when he hath made an end.—Having finished the expiation
for himself, his fellow priests, and the sanctuary with its utensils, the goat destined
by lot for Azazel, which was standing in the court before the Lord, was now brought
to the high priest, that he might complete the sin-offering for the Israelites.
PETT, "Verse 20
“And when he has made an end of atoning for the holy place, and the tent of
meeting, and the altar, he shall present the live goat,”
Having made atonement for the Holy Place, the tent of meeting and the altar he will
then present the live goat, presumably before Yahweh. The separate mention of the
altar here in this way seems to some to confirm that the altar previously mentioned
was the altar of burnt offering.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:20 And when he hath made an end of reconciling the holy
[place], and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar, he shall bring the live
goat:
Ver. 20. Reconciling the holy place.] Defiled in some sort by the sins of the people, in
whose behalf the priests there performed their service.
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:20, Leviticus 16:21
The second part of the ceremonies of the day now commences. It was not enough
that the defilement of the sanctuary should be covered, and the sins of the priests
and people atoned for by the blood of the sacrifices. There remained a consciousness
of sin. How was this to be taken away? To effect this, Aaron proceeds to the unique
ceremony of the day by which the utter removal of sin from the reconciled people is
typified. He shall bring the live goat; this should be translated offer the live goat. It
is the word used above for the offering of the goat that was slain, and it is the word
always used for offering sacrifices to the Lord. The first goat had been offered in the
usual manner, the offerer laying his hand on his head and perhaps praying over
116

117. him. Now the second goat is offered, the high priest having to lay both his hands
upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children
of Israel,… putting them upon the head of the goat. The confession of sins, at first
extempore, would naturally, as time progressed, become stereotyped into a liturgical
form, as it is found in the Mishna: "O Lord, they have committed iniquity; they
have transgressed; they have sinned,—thy people, the house of Israel. O Lord, cover
over, I entreat thee, their iniquities, their transgressions, and their sins, which they
have wickedly committed, transgressed, and sinned before thee,—thy people, the
house of Israel. As it is written in the Law of Moses thy servant, saying, ' For on that
day shall it be covered over for you, to make you clean; from all your sins before the
Lord ye shall be cleansed'" (Edersheim, 'Temple Service '). During this confession
of sins the people remained prostrate in humiliation and prayer in the court of the
tabernacle, and it was the custom of the high priest to turn towards them as he
pronounced the last words, "Ye shall be cleansed." At the conclusion of the
confession, the high priest handed over the goat to a fit man, that is, to a man who
was standing ready to take charge of him, and sent him away by his hand into the
wilderness.
21 He is to lay both hands on the head of the live
goat and confess over it all the wickedness and
rebellion of the Israelites—all their sins—and put
them on the goat’s head. He shall send the goat
away into the wilderness in the care of someone
appointed for the task.
BARNES, "Lev_16:18
The order of the ceremony required that atonement should first be made for the most
holy place with the mercy-seat, then for the holy place with the golden altar, and then for
the altar in the court. See Lev_16:20, Lev_16:33. The horns of the brazen altar were
touched with the blood, as they were in the ordinary sin-offerings. Lev_4:25, Lev_4:30,
Lev_4:34.
Of the blood of the bullock, and of the blood of the goat - Some of the blood of
the two victims was mingled together in a basin.
CLARKE, "Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head, etc. - What this
117

118. imposition of hands meant see in the notes on Exo_29:10 (note), and Lev_1:4 (note).
And confess over him all the iniquities - transgressions - sins - The three
terms used here, Iniquities, ‫עונת‬ avonoth, from ‫עוה‬ avah, to pervert, distort, or turn
aside; Transgressions, ‫פשעים‬ peshaim, from ‫פשע‬ pasha, to transgress, to rebel; and Sins,
‫חטאת‬ chattaoth, from ‫חטא‬ chata, to miss the mark, are supposed by the Jews to
comprise every thing that implies a breach of the Divine law, or an offense against God.
See Clarke’s note on Gen_12:13. Maimonides gives us the confession in the following
words: -
“O Lord, thy people, the house of Israel, have sinned and done iniquity, and trespassed
before thee. O Lord, make atonement now for the iniquities and transgressions and sins
that thy people, the house of Israel, have sinned and transgressed against thee; as it is
written in the law of Moses thy servant, saying: That in this day he shall make atonement
for you, to cleanse you from all your sins before the Lord, and ye shall be clean.” - See the
Mishna, vol. ii., p. 329. When this confession was finished, the goat was sent by a proper
hand to the wilderness, and there let loose; and nothing farther was ever heard of it. Did
not all this signify that Christ has so carried and borne away our sins, that against them
who receive him as the only true atoning sacrifice they should never more be brought to
remembrance? On the head of the scape-goat, a piece of scarlet cloth was tied, and the
tradition of the Jews states that if God accepted the sacrifice, the scarlet cloth turned
white while the goat was led to the desert; but if God had not accepted this expiation, the
redness continued, and the rest of the year was spent in mourning. From the foundation
of the Church of God it was ever believed by his followers, that there were certain
infallible tokens by which he discovered to genuine believers his acceptance of them and
their services. This was sometimes done by a fire from heaven consuming the sacrifice;
sometimes by an oracular communication to the priest or prophet; and at other times,
according to the Jewish account, by changing the fillet or cloth on the head of the scape-
goat from scarlet to white: but most commonly, and especially under the Gospel
dispensation, he gives this assurance to true believers by the testimony of his Spirit in
their consciences, that he has forgiven their iniquities, transgressions, and sins, for his
sake who has carried their griefs, and borne their sorrows.
GILL, "And Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat,.... In
this order as the Targum of Jonathan says, his right hand upon his left hand on the head
of the live goat; this was done in the name of the people, hereby transferring their sins,
and the punishment of them, to it:
and confess him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their
transgressions in all their sins; which takes in their sins, greater or lesser, sins of
ignorance and presumption, known or not known (x), even all sorts of and all of them:
the form of confession used in after times was this (y); O Lord, thy people, the house of
Israel, have done perversely, have transgressed sinned berate thee, O Lord, expiate now
the iniquities, transgressions, and sins, in which thy people, the house of Israel, have
done perversely, transgressed, and sinned before thee, as it is written in the law of Moses
thy servant (#Le 16:30;) and it is added, and the priests and people that stood in the
court, when they heard the name Jehovah go out of the mouth of the high priest, they
bowed, and worshipped, and fell upon their faces, and said, blessed be God, let the glory
118

119. of his kingdom be for ever and ever:
putting them upon the head of the goat; that is, the iniquities, transgressions, and
sins of the people of Israel before confessed, and that by confession of them, with
imposition of hands; and which was typical of the imputation of the sins of the people of
God to Christ, of the Lord laying, or causing to meet on him the iniquities of them all,
and of his being made sin by imputation for them:
and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness; whether
the wilderness of Judea, or what other is intended, is not certain. The Targum of
Jonathan calls it the wilderness of Zuck; which, according to the Misnah (z), was three
miles from Jerusalem, at the entrance of the wilderness; and whereas in another Misnah
(a), instead of Bethchadudo, Bethhoron is mentioned, which is said also to be three
miles from Jerusalem: it is not an improbable conjecture of Dr. Lightfoot (b), that the
goat was sent in the way to Bethhoron, which was the same distance from Jerusalem as
the other place was, in the northern coast of Judea, and had very rough hills about it,
and a narrow passage to it. The man, by whom he was sent, was one fit for the purpose,
that knew the way to the wilderness, and was acquainted with it; a man of years and
understanding, and of a disposition suitable for such a service; the Septuagint version
renders it one that was "ready"; and the Targums, one that was "prepared" to go, or
"appointed", and got ready; Jarchi says, the day before; but the Targum of Jonathan a
year ago: perhaps it designs one, that being once appointed, was continued, and so was
used to it from time to time, and constantly did it: the phrase properly signifies "a man
of time" or "opportunity" (c); Aben Ezra finds fault with those who render it a wise man,
but observes, that some of their Rabbins say it was a priest that led the goat to the
wilderness, which he approves of; according to the Misnah (d), all were fit for this
service (formerly common and unclean), but what the high priest did (afterwards) was
fixed, and they did not suffer an Israelite to lead him (i.e. a common Israelite, one that
was not a priest); according to the Talmud (e), even a stranger, and an unclean person,
was fit for this service. In the mystical sense, by this fit man, or man of opportunity, is
not meant, according to Abarbinel, Nebuchadnezzar, who led the children of Israel into
the wilderness of the people, into the Babylonish captivity; but rather, if it could be
understood of Christ being sent, and carried into the wilderness of the Gentile world,
upon his resurrection and ascension to heaven, the Apostle Paul might be thought of;
who was a chosen vessel to carry his name there, and was eminently the apostle of the
Gentiles: but seeing by Azazel, to whom this goat was let go, Satan seems to be meant; if,
as some think (f), Christ was baptized on the day of atonement, and on that day was led
by the Spirit to the wilderness of Judea, there to be tempted of the devil, that might be
considered as a very singular accomplishment of the type; and the Jews seem to expect
the Messiah on the day of atonement (g): or rather, as Witsius (h) observes, the hand of
the fit man may denote the power that rose up against Christ, namely, the Gentiles and
the people of Israel, and particularly Pilate, who took care that Christ, burdened with the
cross, an emblem of the curse, should be led without the gate, where he had his last
conflict with the devil; See Gill on Lev_16:10. This is applied to Pilate by Origen (i).
COKE, "Verse 21
Leviticus 16:21. And Aaron shall lay both his hands— See Exodus 29:10 and, for the
spiritual meaning of this ceremony, see Leviticus 16:10 of this chapter, and the
119

120. reflections at the conclusion of it. Most other nations had their piacular sacrifices, to
which they first transferred the sins of the public, imprecating upon them all the
evils which might have befallen themselves, and then they put the victims to death.
Many went so far as to offer human sacrifices to this effect; from a superstitious
notion, that the more valuable the matter of the sacrifice was, the more acceptable it
was to their gods. Thus we are told, that among the people of Marseilles, in time of a
plague, one of their poor was accustomed to offer himself to be maintained for a
twelvemonth at the public charge, upon some kind of food which they reckoned
more pure and holy than ordinary; after which, being dressed up like a victim, he
was led over all the town, amidst curses and solemn imprecations that upon him
might fall all the evils of the whole community; and then he was thrown into the sea,
or over a precipice. (See Petronius Arbiter, Sat. ad sin.) Justin tells us the same of
the Carthaginians; see his 18th book, 6th chap. From Lactantius we learn, that
Saturn was honoured in the same impious manner. (Instr. lib. i. c. 21.) And the case
was the same in many other nations.* Who can fail discerning in all this a manifest
reference to the desire of all nations, the grand piacular sacrifice for the sins of the
whole world?
* See Herod. lib. ii. c. 39. and Plutarch de Isid. & Osir. p. 363.
By the hand of a fit man into the wilderness— A fit man signifies, a man who is
fitted, ready, or appointed. The rabbins say it was one of the priests. This person
was to convey the scape-goat into a land of separation, and there to dismiss him,
according to the express letter of the law; Leviticus 16:22 though some say, it was
usual to throw the goat down a rock; which, though it might be done in after-times,
is in evident contradiction to the letter of this passage. Indeed, if we are to believe
the accounts which the rabbins have given us, a multiplicity of ceremonies were
added to this institution, for which there is no authority in the law: and, on that
account, they claim not the attention of a commentator.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 21
(21) And Aaron shall lay both his hands.—With the imposition of “both his hands,”
a phrase which only occurs in this ceremony, the high priest indicated in the most
solemn manner possible that the animal was intended both for the priesthood and
for the laity.
And confess over him all the iniquities.—This confession, which was at first
extempore, was formulated during” the second Temple as follows: “O Lord, thy
people, the house of Israel, have sinned, and done iniquity, and transgressed before
thee. O Lord, I beseech thee, cover over the sins, the iniquities and the
transgressions that thy people, the house of Israel, have sinned, have done
iniquitously, and have transgressed before thee, as it is written in the Law of thy
servant Moses” (Leviticus 16:30). The priests and the people who stood in the court
when they heard the high priest utter the Ineffable name, Jehovah—which in the
time of Christ was only pronounced on this day, and that by the pontiff—prostrated
120

121. themselves, and with their faces to the ground responded, “Blessed be the name of
His glorious kingdom for ever and ever.”
Putting them upon the head of the goat.—By this imposition of hands, and the
confession, the high priest transferred the sins of the nation to the goat. He then
turned to the people, and declared, “Ye shall be clean.”
Send him away by the hand of a fit man.—The guilt-laden animal was then
entrusted to a man previously appointed, to be conducted to the lonely region, the
abode of Azazel, thus carrying back to him the sins which he enticed the people to
commit during the year. The phrase which is here rendered by “a fit man,” and
which occurs nowhere else in the Bible, denotes more properly a timely man, a man
at hand, one appointed for the occasion. The marginal rendering, “a man of
opportunity,” is still more objectionable.
PETT 21-22, "Verse 21-22
“And Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over
him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions, even all
their sins, and he shall put them on the head of the goat, and shall send him away by
the hand of a man that is in readiness into the wilderness, and the goat shall bear on
him all their iniquities to a solitary land, and he shall let go the goat in the
wilderness.”
Having presented the live he-goat before Yahweh, Aaron is now to lay both hands
on its head and confess over it ‘all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all
their transgressions, even all their sins’. The description is all encompassing.
Included within it were their inner sins and their outward behaviour, sins in both
thought and deed, and failure to do what God required, including rebellions of the
heart (pesa’). But not sins done with a high hand. These last, if to be forgiven,
required special mercy from God individually given as in the case of David with
Bathsheba. But usually they received the death penalty.
The laying on of one hand would have demonstrated representation, the laying on of
two either demonstrated transference, or that he was indicating that it represented
both priest and people (or both may have been intended).
The sins and transgressions of Israel are seen as ‘put on’ the head of the live he-goat.
It is to be seen as carrying all their sins with it. Then the live goat is sent away into
the wilderness by the hand of a man already selected and waiting in readiness,
‘bearing on it all their iniquities to a solitary land’, and there he is to let it go.
Clearly the intention was that this would be far enough away from the camp to
ensure that it never returned. It is to be a place where no men dwell. The wilderness
was to them a place where God rules without interference (Genesis 16:7; Exodus 5:1
and often). There was Sinai, the mountain of God (Exodus 3:1 with Exodus 12;
Exodus 19:2-3; Exodus 19:20 and often). The goat was being left for God to do with
121

122. as He willed.
The idea is clear. All the sins of Israel have been borne away and are carried by
another. With both the living bird (Leviticus 14:7) and the he-goat there seems to be
the emphasis that they remained alive. They could not be offered to Yahweh, and
any way of killing them would have been seen in that way. They were thus banished
from Israel for ever, and left with God. (This incidentally make clear that offerings
and sacrifices were not themselves usually seen as being infused with men’s sins.
They were rather offered in death on behalf of men’s sins, a different concept).
There is in this a vivid reminder here that earthly ritual could not finally deal with
sin. There was no way that sin could be destroyed. It would be left to wander in a
desolate place. Its destruction would await the coming of One Who would put away
sin by the sacrifice of Himself (Hebrews 9:26), and Who would destroy him that had
the power of death, the Devil (Hebrews 2:14; 1 John 3:8).
We have in this vivid picture of the live he-goat the reminder that our Lord Jesus
Christ too was ‘made sin for us’ (2 Corinthians 5:21). He took on Himself our sin,
that we might be imbued with His righteousness. He was not only an offering and
sacrifice for our sins, bearing their deserved punishment, but actually took them on
Himself and bore them away with Him. He bore them to that must desolate of
places, His grave. But such was His holiness and the sufficiency of His once-for-all
sacrifice that those sins were neutralised, nay were destroyed, so that He did not
need to remain in a solitary place, but was raised from the dead and glorified as the
firstfruits of His own work.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:21. All the iniquities — He mentions iniquities,
transgressions, and sins, to denote sins of all sorts, and that a free and full
confession was to be made, and that the smallest sins needed, and the greatest sins
were not excluded from, the benefit of Christ’s death here represented. On the
head — Charging all their sins and the punishment due to them upon the goat,
which, though only a ceremony, yet being done according to God’s appointment,
and manifestly pointing at Christ, upon whom their iniquities and punishments
were laid, (Isaiah 53:5-6,) it was available for this end. And hence the heathens took
their custom of selecting one beast or man, upon whom they laid all their
imprecations and curses, and whom they killed as an expiatory sacrifice for their
sins, and to prevent their ruin. A fit man — Hebrew, a man of time, that is, of years
and discretion, who might be trusted with this work. Into the wilderness — Which
signified the removal of their sins far away both from the people, and out of God’s
sight. And here the goat being neglected by all men, and exposed to many hazards
from wild beasts, which were numerous there, might further signify Christ’s being
forsaken both by God and by men, even by his own disciples, and the many dangers
and sufferings he underwent.
WHEDON, " 21. Lay… hands upon — See Leviticus 16:21, and Leviticus 1:4, notes.
Among the modern orthodox Jews, instead of the scapegoat, a cock is substituted,
122

123. which they call an atonement. On the eve of the day of atonement they swing this
cock three times around their head, each time saving, in Hebrew, “This is to be
sacrificed instead of me.” Then it is slaughtered and eaten.
And confess — The Mishna preserves the form of confession: “O Lord, thy people,
the house of Israel, have transgressed, they have rebelled, they have sinned before
thee. I beseech thee now absolve their transgressions, their rebellion and their sin
that they have sinned against thee, as it is written in the law of Moses thy servant,”
concluding with Leviticus 16:30.
All the iniquities — This includes all those sins of penitent Israelites for which the
ordinary sacrifices did not avail. See Leviticus 16:9, note.
Putting them upon the head of the goat — Here is a positive proof that the laying on
of hands upon a victim symbolically transferred the sins of the offerer. The high
priest was accustomed to pronounce the following confession of sins, placing both
hands on the goat’s head: “O Jehovah, thy people, the house of Israel hath sinned,
transgressed, and committed wickedness before thee. O Jehovah, let atonement be
made for the sins, transgressions, and wickedness whereby thy people, the house of
Israel, hath sinned.” Joseph Roberts, who was for years a Wesleyan missionary in
India, tells of a Hindoo custom which seems to recognise the devotedness of a
substitute goat, which is set at liberty by one who seeks divine favour. “When a
person is sick,” says Roberts, “he vows, on his recovery, to set a goat at liberty in
honour of his deity. Having selected a suitable one from his flocks he makes a slit in
the ear, or ties a yellow string round its neck, and lets it go whithersoever it pleases.
Whoever sees the animal knows it to be a nate kadi, ‘the vowed goat,’ and no person
will molest it.… When a person has committed what he considers a great sin he does
the same thing; but, in addition to other ceremonies, he sprinkles the animal with
water, puts his hands upon it, and prays to be forgiven.”
Fit man — “A man that is in readiness.” R.V. He was appointed at a suitable time,
hence skilled in his office. Tradition says that he was not an Israelite.
Wilderness — See Leviticus 16:10, note. In the time of Christ the scapegoat was led
to a high rock, twelve miles from Jerusalem, down which it was precipitated and
killed. This was done by relays of men stationed along the route a sabbath day’s
journey, two thousand paces, apart. By this arrangement the goat was hurried
rapidly along and dashed down the precipice, and the fact was quickly telegraphed
back from man to man to the vast congregation in the holy city, who awaited in
breathless silence the sequel which assured them that their sins had been
successfully borne away, according to the ritual, when a shout of gladness went up
to heaven. — Delitzsch on the Hebrews, Appendix.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:21 And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the
live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all
their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and
123

124. shall send [him] away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness:
Ver. 21. All their transgressions in all their sins,] i.e., In their several circumstances
and aggravations: laying open how many transgressions were wrapped up in their
several sins. This was to bring out their sins, as they took the vessels of the temple,
[Ezra 8:34] "by number and by weight."
SIMEON, "THE SCAPE-GOAT A TYPE OF CHRIST
Leviticus 16:21-22. And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live
goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their
transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the coat, and shall
send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness. And the goat shall bear
upon him all their iniquities, unto a land not inhabited.
OF all the types, under the Mosaic dispensation, there was not one more plain in its
import, or more useful in its tendency, than that before us. Most other types receive
light from their accomplishment in Christ: this reflects light on the Gospel itself.
The high-priest, having before offered a bullock and a ram, was to take two goats;
and, having determined by lot which of them should be killed, and which be kept
alive, was to kill the one, and to sprinkle its blood, with the blood of the bullock,
within the sanctuary, and then to present the other before the Lord in the manner
described in the text: he was to confess over it the sins of the people, and, by putting
his hands upon its head, to transfer to it the people’s sins: and then to send it into
the wilderness that it might never more be seen of men. This ceremony pointed out
to them the true and proper object of faith: the operation of it on the believer’s
mind; and the fruit and benefit of it to his soul.
I. The true and proper object of faith—
[When the high-priest put his hands on the head of the scape-goat, the eyes of all
present must of necessity be turned towards that devoted creature. They indeed who
were endued with a spiritual discernment, would look through the type unto Christ
the great Antitype: but still the goat would be regarded by all as the immediate
instrument used by God for the removal of their sins: their faith terminated on that
as the instituted means of their deliverance.
Thus is Christ the one object to whom the eyes of all must be directed. He has been
chosen of God from all eternity to bear in his own person, and to take away from his
people, all their sins [Note: Revelation 13:8.]. In due time he was exhibited to the
world in this very character [Note: Romans 3:25. See also John 1:29; 2 Corinthians
5:21.]: the iniquities of all mankind were laid upon him [Note: Isaiah 53:6.]: and his
command to every living creature is, Look unto Me and be ye saved [Note: Isaiah
45:22.].
There was indeed under the law another goat, whose blood was shed for the
124

125. remission of their sins; which was therefore to be considered by them as a joint
object of their faith. But the two together were, in fact, but one sacrifice, the one
representing the death of Jesus, and the other his resurrection. While therefore we
view Christ as dying for our offences, we must also, in conformity with the type
before us, regard him as rising again for our justification [Note: Romans 4:25.].]
II. Its operation on the believer’s mind—
[The high-priest confessed over the scape-goat the sins of all Israel with their several
aggravations, at the very time that he transferred them to him by the imposition of
his hands. By this significant ordinance he clearly shewed how faith always
operates. It leads us in the first place to transfer all our guilt to the sacred head of
Jesus. While we see the impossibility of removing our sins in any other way, faith
will incline us to avail ourselves of that inestimable privilege of carrying them to the
Saviour, and thereby securing to ourselves an everlasting deliverance from them.
But will it therefore cause us to think lightly of our iniquities, because they may be
cancelled by such means? No: it will rather make them to appear exceeding sinful;
and will dispose us to humble ourselves for them in dust and ashes. A true believer
will not so much as desire pardon without being made to feel the evil and bitterness
of sin: and the more sincerely he looks to Christ, the more unfeignedly will he
bewail his manifold transgressions [Note: Ezekiel 16:63.]. While, with Mary, he
boldly confesses Christ, with her he will kiss his feet, and wash them with his tears
[Note: Luke 7:37-38.].]
III. The fruit and benefit of it to his soul—
[No sooner was the ordinance before us duly performed, than the sins of all Israel
were taken away, and God was reconciled to his offending people. This indeed being
only a typical institution, the pardon obtained by means of it was neither perfect nor
durable, except to them who looked through the type to Christ himself. But faith in
Christ, whether exercised by them or us, will obtain a full and everlasting remission
of all our sins. Under the law indeed, there were some sins for which no sacrifice
was appointed, and which therefore could not be purged away by any ceremonial
oblations whatever. But there is no sin from which we shall not be justified by faith
in Jesus [Note: Acts 13:39.]. From the very instant that we are enabled to lay them
upon his head, they shall be carried into the land of oblivion, and never more be
remembered against us [Note: Isaiah 43:25; Hebrews 8:12.]: yea, they shall be cast
into the very depths of the sea [Note: Micah 7:19.], and be put away from us far as
the east is from the west [Note: Psalms 103:12.].]
From hence we may learn,
1. The different offices of repentance and faith—
[Repentance can never make atonement for sin. However penitent we be, we must
lay our hands upon the head of the scape-goat, and transfer our guilt to him. On the
125

126. other hand, faith does not supersede repentance, but rather encourages and invites
us to it. We must repent, in order to prepare our hearts for a grateful acceptance of
pardon, and a diligent improvement of it in our future life: but we must believe in
order to obtain pardon; that being bestowed solely on account of Christ’s vicarious
sacrifice. Repentance stirs us up to exercise faith on Christ; and faith stimulates us
to further acts of penitence, for the honouring of the law, the justifying of God, the
exalting of Christ, the purifying of the heart, the adorning of our profession, and the
rendering of us meet for glory. To be in a state pleasing to God, we must be
believing penitents, and penitent believers.]
2. The folly of delaying to repent and believe—
[Impenitence and unbelief keep us from Christ, and rivet our sins upon us. “We
must all resemble either the oblation, or the offerer: we must either, like the goats,
die under the wrath of God, and be for ever banished, as accursed creatures, from
his presence; or we must go with penitence and contrition to our living Surety, and
cast our iniquities on him. And can there be a doubt which state we should prefer?
Or would we continue another hour under the guilt of all our sins, when there is
such a way provided for the removal of them? Let us then behold the Scape-goat, as
in our immediate presence, and go instantly to lay our sins on him. It cannot, as
under the law, be done by the priest for us; it must be done by every one of us for
himself. Let us then go to him with penitence and faith, and rest assured that we
shall not repent or believe in vain.]
22 The goat will carry on itself all their sins to a
remote place; and the man shall release it in the
wilderness.
BARNES, "Lev_16:22
Unto a land not inhabited - Unto a place cut off, or (as in the margin) a place “of
separation.”
It is evident that the one signification of the ceremony of this goat was the complete
removal of the sins which were confessed over him. No symbol could so plainly set forth
the completeness of Yahweh’s acceptance of the penitent, as a sin-offering in which a life
126

127. was given up for the altar, and yet a living being survived to carry away all sin and
uncleanness.
GILL, "And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not
inhabited,.... Where it would never be seen, and from whence it would never return
more; and so was a proper type of Christ, who has borne all the sins of all his people in
his own body on the cross, and all the punishment due unto them; and so has made full
satisfaction for them, and has removed them from them, as far as the east is from the
west, and out of the sight of avenging justice; so that when they are sought they shall not
be found, nor shall they ever return unto them, or be brought against them any more;
see Isa_53:12,
and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness; that is, the man that was appointed
to have him thither; and so the Targum of Jonathan,"and the man shall let go the goat
into the wilderness of Zuck; and the goat shall go upon the mountains of Beth Chadure
(or Chadudo), and a tempestuous wind from the Lord shall drive him down, and he shall
die.''The manner of conducting this whole affair was this; they made for him a causeway
(i.e. for the man that had the goat committed to his care, to have it out of the court, and
out of the city), because of the Babylonians, who would pluck him by the hair, and say,
Get out, begone, get out, begone. The nobles of Jerusalem accompanied him to the first
booth, for there were ten booths from Jerusalem to Zuck, which were ninety furlongs,
seven and a half to every mile; at every (i.e. twelve miles) at every booth they said to him,
Lo food, lo water, and they accompanied him from booth to booth, excepting the last of
them; for there was not one went with him to Zuck, but stood afar off, and observed
what he did: what did he do? he parted a scarlet line, half of it he bound to the rock, and
half of it he bound between his horns (the goat's), and pushed him backwards, and he
rolled and went down, but before he came half way down the mountain he was dashed to
pieces; then he (the man) went and sat under the last booth until it was dark--they said
to the high priest, the goat is got to the wilderness; but from whence did they know that
the goat was got to the wilderness? they made watchtowers or beacons, and they waved
linen cloths, and so knew when the goat was come to the Wilderness (k). But the
Scripture is entirely silent about the death of this goat, though it no doubt died in the
wilderness, only says that it was let go, and was at liberty to go where it would;
intimating that the people of Israel were free from all their sins, and they should be no
more seen nor remembered; typical of the deliverance and freedom of the people of God
from all their sins by Christ. This affair was imitated by Satan among the Heathens,
particularly the Egyptians, as has been observed by many out of Herodotus (l); who
relates, that they used to imprecate many things upon the head of a beast slain for
sacrifice, and then carried it to market, where were Grecian merchants, to whom they
sold it; but if there were none, they cast it into the river, execrating the head after this
manner, that if any evil was to befall either themselves that sacrificed, or all Egypt, it
might be turned upon that head. And on account of this custom, which obtained among
all the Egyptians, no one among them would ever taste the head of any animal; which
Plutarch (m) also affirms, who says, that having made an execration upon the head of
the sacrifice, and cut it off, formerly they cast it into the river, but now they give it to
strangers. And a like custom obtained among other nations, as the Massilians and
Grecians (n).
COKE, "Leviticus 16:22. The goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities— See
127

128. Isaiah 53. 1 Peter 2:24. Many learned writers, and among the rest Dr. Jackson on
the Creed, maintain, that our blessed Saviour entered on this great day of
atonement on his office of Mediator: for on this day, they assert, he was baptized:
and as being then declared by a voice from heaven to be the Son of God, and
immediately driven by the spirit into the wilderness, John the Baptist could not but
look upon him as the Redeemer typified by the scapegoat: and as he went into the
wilderness on the day of atonement, immediately after the people had confessed
their sins, John could not but acknowledge that Christ was sent to take upon him
the sins of the world, and do them away, by being in a proper season slain as a
sacrifice for them. We learn the nature of Christ's sacrifice very fully from these
and the like ceremonies: see Outram de Sacrificiis.
ELLICOTT, " (22) Unto a land not inhabited.—Literally, unto a land cut off, that
is, a place the ground of which is separated from all around it, hence a summit, a
peak standing out by itself, a precipice.
In the wilderness.—Where no human beings dwell, but which is the abode of evil
spirits. It will be seen that the directions here are simply to conduct the goat into the
wilderness, where it is apparently to be let loose to pursue its own course. During
the second Temple, however, the authorities decreed that the animal must be
destroyed. Accordingly one of the priests who was appointed to execute this mission
led the goat to a rock called Zuck, in the wilderness, situate about twelve miles, or
ninety furlongs, from Jerusalem. Between the holy city and this steep rock, ten
booths were erected at intervals of one mile, and persons were located in every
booth to accompany the messenger to the next tent, which was distant a Sabbath
day’s journey. From the last booth to the rock, which was double this distance, the
messenger had no companion, but he was carefully watched by the occupants of the
last booth to see that he performed the ritual according to the prescribed order. On
his arrival at the mountain he divided the crimson thread, which was the badge of
the goat, into two; one half he fastened to the rock, and the other he tied between the
two horns of the victim, and then pushed the animal down the projecting ledge of
the rock, when it was dashed to pieces before it reached the bottom. Hereupon the
persons stationed at the last booth to watch the proceedings waved linen cloths or
white flags, thus signalling from station to station to the priests in the court of the
Temple the arrival of the goat at its proper destination.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:22. Unto a land not inhabited — ‫גזרה‬ ‫ארצ‬ erets gezra, a
land cut off separated, remote from intercourse with men. The Seventy render it
αβατον, untrod, unpassable, a land through which none travelled. The sending away
into this desert land the goat, over which the sins of the people had been humbly
and penitently confessed, and to which they were figuratively transferred, was
certainly a fine and most expressive emblem that, on condition of the repentance of
mankind, and their faith in him who was represented by this goat, and was in due
time to take away the sins of the world, God would remember their sins and
iniquities no more.
128

129. TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:22 And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto
a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.
Ver. 22. Shall let go the goat.] The Hebrews say, that he was to throw it down the
rock, and so it died. The Grecians had a like custom (a) in their solemn expiations of
their cities. They tumbled the persons devoted from some rock into the sea;
sacrificing them to Neptune, saying, Be thou a propitiation for us. (b)
GREAT TEXTS OF THE BIBLE, "The Scapegoat
The goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a solitary land.—Lev_16:22.
I
The Day of Atonement
This is part of the ritual of the Day of Atonement. Now the Day of Atonement
represents the culminating institution of the Levitical system. Not only, from a
merely formal point of view, does Leviticus 16 form the climax of the sacrificial and
purificatory ordinances contained in Leviticus 1-15, but the ceremonial itself is of a
peculiarly comprehensive and representative character. It was a yearly atonement
for the nation as a whole (including the priests); and not only for the nation, but also
for the sanctuary, in its various parts, in so far as this had been defined during the
past year by the sins of the people in whose midst it stood.
In Rabbinical literature the Day of Atonement becomes practically the great Day of
Repentance, the culmination of the Ten Days of Repentance. It brings with itself
purification, the Father in Heaven making white the sin committed by the son, by
His forgiveness and pardon. “It is the Day of the Lord, great and very terrible,”
inasmuch as it becomes a day of judgment, but also the Day of Salvation. “Israel is
steeped in sin through the Evil Yezer in their body, but they do repentance and the
Lord forgives their sins every year, and renews their heart to fear Him.” “On the
Day of Atonement I will create you a new creation.” It is thus a penitential day in
the full and in the best sense of the word.1 [Note: S. Schechter.]
The Talmudical treatise on the ritual of the Day of Atonement is entitled Yoma, “the
day,” which sufficiently expresses its importance in the series of sacrificial
observances. It was the confession of the incompleteness of them all, a ceremonial
proclamation that ceremonies do not avail to take away sin; and it was also a
declaration that the true end of worship is not reached till the worshipper has free
access to the holy place of the Most High. Thus the prophetic element is the very life-
breath of this supreme institution of the old covenant, which therein acknowledges
its own defects, and feeds the hopes of a future better thing.1 [Note: A. Maclaren.]
II
129

130. The Two Goats
1. On this day the Congregation of Israel brought two goats for the purpose of
atonement. For these, lots were cast at the door of the sanctuary, “one lot for
Jehovah, and the other lot for Azazel.” The one on which the lot of Jehovah fell was
then slain as a sin-offering. The other was brought before God “to make atonement
over it, to send it away for Azazel into the wilderness.” Then, after the sins of the
congregation had been confessed, this animal was made the bearer of all the sins of
the now reconciled Israel, and was led away into the wilderness and there let loose
“in a solitary land.”
Most solemn as the services had hitherto been, the worshippers would chiefly think
with awe of the high-priest going into the immediate presence of God, coming out
thence alive, and securing for them by the blood the continuance of the Old
Testament privileges of sacrifices and of access unto God through them. What now
took place concerned them, if possible, even more nearly. Their own personal guilt
and sins were now to be removed from them, and that in a symbolical rite, at one
and the same time the most mysterious and the most significant of all. All this while
the “scapegoat,” with the “scarlet-tongue,” telling of the guilt it was to bear, had
stood looking eastwards, confronting the people, and waiting for the terrible load
which it was to carry away “unto a land not inhabited.” Laying both his hands on
the head of this goat, the high-priest now confessed and pleaded: “Ah, Jehovah!
they have committed iniquity; they have transgressed; they have sinned—Thy
people, the house of Israel. Oh, then, Jehovah! cover over (atone for), I intreat Thee,
upon their iniquities, their transgressions, and their sins, which they have wickedly
committed, transgressed, and sinned before Thee—Thy people, the house of Israel.
As it is written in the law of Moses, Thy servant, saying: “For on that day shall it be
covered over (atoned) for you, to make you clean; from all your sins before Jehovah,
ye shall be cleansed.” And while the prostrate multitude worshipped at the name of
Jehovah, the high-priest turned his face towards them as he uttered the last words,
“Ye shall be cleansed!” as if to declare to them the absolution and remission of their
sins. Then a strange scene would be witnessed. The priests led the sin-burdened goat
out through “Solomon’s Porch,” and, as tradition has it, through the eastern gate,
which opened upon the Mount of Olives. Here an arched bridge spanned the
intervening valley, and over it they brought the goat to the Mount of Olives, where
one, specially appointed for the purpose, took him in charge. Tradition enjoins that
he should be a stranger, a non-Israelite, as if to make still more striking the type of
Him who was delivered over by Israel unto the Gentiles. Scripture tells us no more
of the destiny of the goat that bore upon him all the iniquities of the children of
Israel, than that they “shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the
wilderness,” and that “he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.” But tradition
supplements this information. The distance between Jerusalem and the beginning of
“the wilderness” is computed at ninety stadia, making precisely ten intervals, each
half a Sabbath-day’s journey from the other. At the end of each of these intervals
there was a station, occupied by one or more persons, detailed for the purpose, who
offered refreshment to the man leading the goat, and then accompanied him to the
130

131. next station. By this arrangement two results were secured: some trusted persons
accompanied the goat all along his journey, and yet none of them walked more than
a Sabbath-day’s journey—that is, half a journey going and the other half returning.
At last they reached the edge of the wilderness. Here they halted, viewing afar off,
while the man led forth the goat, tore off half the “scarlet-tongue,” and stuck it on a
projecting cliff; then, leading the animal backwards, he pushed it over the
projecting ledge of rock. There was a moment’s pause, and the man, now defiled by
contact with the sin-bearer, retraced his steps to the last of the ten stations, where he
spent the rest of the day and the night. But the arrival of the goat in the wilderness
was immediately telegraphed, by the waving of flags, from station to station, till, a
few minutes after its occurrence, it was known in the Temple, and whispered from
ear to ear, that “the goat had borne upon him all their iniquities into a land not
inhabited.”1 [Note: Edersheim, The Temple, 317.]
2. What, then, was the meaning of a rite on which such momentous issues
depended? Everything about it seems strange and mysterious—the lot that
designated it, and that “to Azazel”, the fact that, though the highest of all sin-
offerings, it was neither sacrificed nor its blood sprinkled in the Temple; and the
circumstance that it really was only part of a sacrifice—the two goats together
forming one sacrifice, one of them being killed, and the other “let go,” there being
no other analogous case of the kind except at the purification of a leper, when one
bird was killed, and the other dipped in its blood, and let go free. For the common
worshipper, then, the broad impression of this Day of Atonement was that the sins
of the people were not only atoned for by the death of a victim, but separated from
them and banished to forgetfulness through the same offering in another phase.
While in the typical sacrifice this could be effected only by means of two victims, in
the eternal reality to which it pointed the one Saviour who died and rose again
becomes at once the atoning Sacrifice and the risen Sanctifier by whom our sin is
removed.
These two goats were not for Aaron, but for the people. We must regard them as if
they were but one offering, for it needed both of them to set forth the divine plan by
which sin is put away; one was to die, and the other was typically to bear away the
sins of the people. One goat was to show how sin is put away in reference to God by
sacrifice, and the other goat was to show how it is put away in reference to us, God’s
people, by being carried into oblivion.1 [Note: C. H. Spurgeon.]
Man hath not done anything on the day of sacrifice more pleasing to God than
spilling blood; for verily the animal sacrificed will come on the day of resurrection
with its horns, its hair, its hoofs, and will make the scale of his good actions heavy:
and verily its blood reacheth the acceptance of God, before it falleth upon the
ground: therefore be joyful in it.2 [Note: Saying of Muhammad.]
III
For Azazel
131

132. 1. Of the two goats it is stated (Exo_16:8) that the one was “for Jehovah,” the other
“for Azazel” (R.V.; the A.V. uses here the word “scapegoat”). “Azazel” is not
mentioned elsewhere in the Old Testament, and its meaning is much disputed. In the
apocryphal Book of Enoch, Azazel is a spirit, the leader of the evil angels who
formed unholy alliances with the “daughters of men” (Gen_6:2; Gen_6:4). But
whatever the precise attributes with which Azazel was invested at the time when the
ritual of Leviticus 16 was framed, there can be little doubt that the ceremonial was
intended as a symbolical declaration that the land and people are now purged from
guilt, their sins being handed over to the evil spirit to whom they are held to belong,
and whose home is in the desolate wilderness, remote from human habitations (Exo_
16:22, “into a land cut off”). No doubt the rite is a survival from an older stage of
popular belief, engrafted on, and accommodated to, the sacrificial system of the
Hebrews. For the expulsion of evils, whether maladies or sins, from a community, by
their being laid symbolically upon a material medium, there are many analogies in
other countries. The belief in goblins, or demons (Jinn), haunting the wilderness and
vexing the traveller, is particularly common in Arabia: in the Old Testament it is
found in Lev_17:7; Isa_13:21; Isa_34:14 (“satyrs,” lit. he-goats, and Lilith, the
night-monster). Azazel must have been such a spirit, sufficiently distinguished from
the rest, in popular imagination, to receive a special name, and no doubt invested
with attributes which, though unknown to us, were perfectly familiar to those for
whom the ceremonial of Leviticus 16 was first designed.
The rendering of the A.V., “scapegoat,” inherited from the “Great Bible” of 1539,
may be traced back through Seb. Münster (“caper abiturus”), Coverdale (“the free
goat”), Luther (“der ledige Bock”), and Jerome (“caper emissarius”) to the Greek
translation of Symmachus; but it implies a derivation opposed to the genius of the
Hebrew language, besides being inconsistent with the marked antithesis between
“for Azazel” and “for Jehovah,” which does not leave it open to doubt that the
former is conceived as a personal being, to whom (cf. Exo_16:26) the goat is sent. All
the principal modern authorities agree in explaining Azazel as a personal name.
“Scapegoat” is, however, a felicitous expression; it has become classical in English;
and there is no reason why it should not be retained as a term descriptive of the goat
sent into the wilderness, provided it be clearly understood that it is in no way a
rendering of the Hebrew.1 [Note: S. R. Driver.]
2. The Jewish rite presents marks of strong kinship with similar rites which are still
observed in every part of the world. It was originally a rite of exorcism, and was
modified into an object-parable of those great ethical lessons which God wished to
impress upon the conscience of the chosen people, and in due time upon the human
race. On the four great continents, and in many islands of the sea, it is carried out,
with the variation due to local conditions, at fixed seasons of the year, or in times of
epidemic. In some form or other it must have been in vogue before the dispersion of
the primitive races, or at least have been suggested by ideas common to mankind in
the cradle-lands of the prehistoric dawn. It was practised amongst unlettered and
classical races alike, and in some parts of Europe variant types of the ceremony have
132

133. survived the spread of the Christian faith.
In some of the islands of South-Eastern Asia the ceremony is found in one of its
most elementary forms. The custom has, of course, adapted itself to conditions
where domestic animals are unknown and the inland areas present no deserts into
which a scape-victim bearing the ills of the people could be dismissed. A ship is
prepared on board which rice, eggs, and tobacco are placed, whilst a priest cries
out: “All ye sicknesses, measles, agues, depart!” The ship is carried down to the
shore, launched when a breeze begins to blow from off the land, and left to drift out
to sea. The priest then cries out, “All the sicknesses are gone!” and the people who
had shut themselves up in their homes through fear come forth again with a sense of
relief. In the inland parts of the island the priests brush the people with branches of
trees which are supposed to gather up all the evil influences that cleave to their
bodies, and then throw the infected branches into the river to be carried out to sea.
A tribe of American Indians make white dogs their scape-victims, and drive them
off into the prairie, whilst another tribe paint a man black to represent a demon and
at last chase him from the village. A similar custom prevails amongst the aborigines
of the Chinese Highlands. In times of epidemic a man is chosen for the victim, his
face is smeared with paint, and with curses and tomtoms he is then driven forth
from the hamlet and forbidden to return.1 [Note: T. G. Selby.]
3. The Jewish religion took hold upon a truth in this crude observance common to
all races, and taught the multitude to look for release from sin by one who should be
made sin for them. In the prefigurative ceremony the burden of the assembly’s sin
was transferred to a pair of victims, one of which was slain at the altar where its life
was offered to an offended God, whilst the other was driven forth into the
wilderness, carrying into inaccessible places the burden placed upon it. The
principle needed fine definitions and careful safeguards in the after-ages, but it
expressed a rough and enduring truth without which social and religious life are
alike impossible. The vicarious principle is not ordained to compromise or destroy
responsibility, but the denial of its presence and working, within divinely appointed
limits, involves the denial of that providential order under which mankind is placed.
But how is the modern world to be taught the vicarious principle when it has so
little knowledge of the meaning of sin? No doubt ignorance of the nature of sin is
largely due to ignorance of the Bible. Holman Hunt tells us his experience of this
double ignorance when he returned from Palestine with his great picture, “The
Scapegoat.”
Mr. Gambart, the picture-dealer, was ever shrewd and entertaining. He came in his
turn to my studio, and I led him to “The Scapegoat.”
“What do you call that?”
“ ‘The Scapegoat.’ ”
133

134. “Yes; but what is it doing?”
“You will understand by the title, Le bouc errant.”
“But why errant?” he asked.
“Well, there is a book called the Bible, which gives au account of the animal. You
will remember.”
“No,” he replied; “I never heard of it.”
“Ah, I forgot, the book is not known in France, but English people read it more or
less,” I said, “and they would all understand the story of the beast being driven into
the wilderness.”
“You are mistaken. No one would know anything about it, and if I bought the
picture it would be left on my hands. Now, we will see,” replied the dealer. “My wife
is an English lady; there is a friend of hers, an English girl, in the carriage with her.
We will ask them up; you shall tell them the title; we will see. Do not say more.”
The ladies were conducted into the room.
“Oh, how pretty! what is it?” they asked.
“It is ‘The Scapegoat,’ ” I said.
There was a pause. “Oh yes,” they commented to one another, “it is a peculiar goat;
you can see by the ears, they droop so.”
The dealer then, nodding with a smile towards me, said to them, “It is in the
wilderness.”
The ladies: “Is that the wilderness now? Are you intending to introduce any others
of the flock?” And so the dealer was proved to be right, and I had over-counted on
the picture’s intelligibility.1 [Note: W. Holman Hunt, Pre-Raphaelitism and the Pre-
Raphaelite Brotherhood, ii. 107.]
4. This rite also provided a form of absolution which comforted the conscience-
stricken Israelite, and gave fresh courage to his soul. It addressed itself to the
imagination, and accomplished this specific end in a more vivid and impressive way
than the common sacrifices of the tabernacle. This action-parable, in which perhaps
there was much of condescension to the superstition of the age, helped men to feel
that the load of guilt was gone, that clouds of gathering wrath had been dispersed,
and that the sky from which God looked down was fair and smiling once more. In
many places where similar rites were observed, the people crouched with fear in
134

135. their houses, and some trace of this feature of the custom appears in the Book of
Leviticus, which forbade the people entering into the tabernacle whilst the goat for
sacrifice was being offered. When the rite had been accomplished, men and women
breathed freely once more, as though the world were no longer a place of penalty
and a prison-house. The sense of fear was dispelled from the heart as the dim figure
of the man leading the scapegoat disappeared over the tops of the hills, and no news
of the year was received with greater gladness than the word signalled back to the
city that the victim with its burden had passed into the waste wilderness. The rite
was obviously adopted to keep alive the expectation of a time when evil should be
cast forth into the desolate spaces of the Universe, and the last trace of sin and its
curse should be taken away from the city and the people of God. The ceremony was
surely a prophecy in symbol of the true Day of Atonement, when the Man of God’s
choice should carry the burdens of the race into the land of forgetfulness and
gracious oblivion.
No sins are reckoned against us by God; on His side they are all put away—in
relation to Him they have no existence. Hence our Lord says (Mat_9:2): “Son, be of
good cheer, thy sins have been done away.” “Son”—for He is speaking to him as to a
child of God, and tells him, without any solicitation on his part, an eternal fact,
viz.—that his sins have no existence as in the mind or eye of God. The same truth is
expressed in the parable of the prodigal son—there is no reckoning of sin against
the prodigal on the father’s side.1 [Note: R. W. Corbet, Letters from a Mystic of the
Present Day, 71.]
Rest, weary heart!
The penalty is borne, the ransom paid,
For all thy sins full satisfaction made!
Strive not to do thyself what Christ has done,
Claim the free gift, and make the joy thine own;
No more by pangs of guilt and fear distrest,
Rest! calmly rest!
IV
Sacrifice and Separation
Once a year the sins of the people were thus solemnly atoned for, and the nation’s
lost holiness was restored (Exo_16:30, “to cleanse you: from all your sins shall ye be
clean before Jehovah”). The slain goat made atonement for the people’s sins, and
restored their peace and fellowship with God; the goat over which the people’s sins
135

136. were confessed, and which was afterwards sent away to Azazel in the wilderness,
symbolized visibly their complete removal from the nation’s midst (Psa_103:12;
Mic_7:19): a life was given up for the altar, and yet a living being survived to carry
away all sin and uncleanness: the entire ceremonial thus symbolized as completely
as possible both the atonement for sin and the entire removal of the cause of God’s
alienation.
1. Sacrifice.—No specific mention is made of this rite in the subsequent books of the
Bible, but it probably coloured the language of the prophet as he portrayed the
Suffering Servant of Jehovah, who was despised and rejected, and from whom men
hid their faces. The iniquity of the erring flock laid by a Divine hand upon His
sacred person suggests the picture of the high priest transferring the common sin to
the scape-victim by words of confession and the laying on of his hands. When the
writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews asserts that it is not possible for “the blood of
bulls and of goats to take away sin,” he perhaps has in view at the moment the
offerings of the great Day of Atonement. This rite of course is included without
express mention in the statement that the meaning of all sacrifice is consummated
and fulfilled in the death of Jesus Christ. Our Lord gathers up into His ministry and
death the peculiar lines of thought indicated in this ceremony. In setting Himself to
deal with the problem of suffering by first of all attacking the problem of sin, Jesus
was bringing home to the multitude the fundamental lesson of this ancient ritual.
2. Separation.—We can almost see the figure of the scape-victim, looming through
the shadows of the night, as Matthew describes the great healer casting out devils
when the sick were brought to His feet in the Sabbath twilight. The evangelist seems
to see the sicknesses He healed transferred to His weary form, and weighting His
sympathetic soul, and sums up the picture in the memorable words of the prophet,
“Himself took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses.” In Jesus Christ the rite
comes back into some kind of external likeness to the primitive form, but with an
unutterable difference, a difference consisting in an overwhelming contrast rather
than a comparison. The scape-victim is the Man of Sorrows, chosen not by lot, but
by the decree of the Most High, proclaimed through signs and wonders which God
did by Him in the midst of the people. He is selected, if we may use the contrast
without irreverence, not like the victim of primitive societies, who was singled out
for the office by a degradation which seemed openly to challenge the wrath of the
gods, but because of His transcendent dignity and holiness. It is no slave or war-
captive who is dragged to this pathetic and ignominious ministry, but the Lord of
heaven and the Prince of the kings of the earth, drawn by His own free compassions
for the guilty and burdened race, made a curse to redeem us from the curse which
cleaves to all offenders against God.
“Unto a solitary land.” The solitude of the Sin-bearer is something altogether
distinct from the solitude of the Holy One. In His human life, our blessed Lord was,
in a certain sense, solitary for this simple reason that He moved on a higher
platform than others. He did not find Himself able to educate His own most intimate
followers into sympathy with His own real aspirations, or to bring them under the
136

137. law of life, under which He moved and acted. They remained of the earth, earthy,
while He was above it, breathing a purer atmosphere, and living by a higher law.
This solitude of holiness separated Him from sinners: but that very separation
which, from time to time, made Him lead, in His humanity, a strange lonesome life,
yet brought Him into such full contact with all the glorious beings and the realities
of the spirit-world, that such a solitude could hardly be looked upon with any
considerable regret, or be the source of any actual pain. But it was otherwise now.
We are speaking, not of the solitude of the Representative of holiness and purity,
but of the solitude of the Sin-bearer, because He was the sin-bearer.1 [Note: W. H.
M. H. Aitken.]
It was a weary journey that the scapegoat took. It left the fertile fields, and the
babbling brooks of Israel, far behind: the distant heights of Carmel disappeared on
the far-off horizon; before it, there opened up a boundless waste of desert sand,
while the “fit man” trudged on relentlessly, farther, and farther, many a weary mile,
and still the scapegoat followed him, bearing the sins of the people. The grassy
plains have disappeared; the last palm tree is lost in the distance; the sound of
running waters has long since died upon the ear; and all around there is the barren
waste of desert sand; and still the man trudges on, and still the scapegoat follows
him. All alone in the desolate wilds, all alone in a blighted land, and not inhabited.
And then the fit man disappears. He had led the goat into the solitude, and lo, it is
left alone—all alone. Wistfully it gazes round on the dreary scene. Oh, for one blade
of grass! oh, for one drop of water! Its eyes are strained, its nostrils dilated, if by
chance it may catch a breath of something like fertility borne in the gale from the
distance: but no. In solitude and weariness it still goes wandering on, and every step
it takes, brings it farther, and farther still, into the silent desolate desert: the
scapegoat is all alone. The weary day drags out its long hours: the dark and
mournful night closes in; the morning sun rises up with blistering heat; its lips are
parched, its limbs are trembling: it sinks amidst the desert sand, and dies. For it
must be remembered that it was a late custom that threw it over the rock; at the
first it was simply left to die.
And so the scapegoat bore the sins of the people into the land of separation. Leave it
there, and come to Calvary.
We seem to see the Scapegoat of the human family led by the hand of the “fit man.”
We read in the Epistle to the Hebrews that the Lord Jesus Christ, “by the eternal
Spirit” offered Himself to God. That same Spirit of God that led Him alone into the
wilderness, not that He might find comfort, but that He might meet with temptation,
has led Him right up to Jerusalem. He set His face like a flint to go; but still the
Spirit led, and still He pursued His leading, until He finds Himself in Gethsemane.
The terrible darkness is beginning to gather round Him, and the agony to oppress
His soul; but the Spirit of God leads on, and the Scapegoat continues to follow. He
finds Himself all alone in the judgment hall, separated from those who were dearest
to Him, and not one friendly voice raised up on behalf of the dying Son of God: but
the Spirit still leads on, and the Scapegoat must still follow. He finds Himself nailed
137

138. to the cross, and His lips are parched with thirst, and His body quails in agony. Will
He not now pause and call for the ten legions of angels? Might He not raise those
languid, dying eyes, and demand a draught of the sparkling waters of life from His
Father’s hand? But the Spirit still leads on; and the Scapegoat must follow. Deeper
and deeper, into the darkness; down into the solitude of sorrow, down into the
desolate land not inhabited; and, by and by, from the breaking heart, there rings
throughout God’s universe the cry of “the Forsaken,” “My God, My God, why hast
Thou forsaken me?” The Scapegoat has found the land of separation at last, all
alone in the darkness. The isolating influences of sin have done their work. He is
shut out from the light of His Father’s eye, or to Himself He seems to be: the joy, the
delight of His Life is gone: the blessed fellowship seems broken: there is a horrible
sense of loneliness within His heart, and a terrible desolation within His guiltless
soul. So He sinks, He staggers, He dies: Jesus, “the Forsaken.”
And so He bore our sins into the land not inhabited. No witnessing spirit can find
them there; no denizen of those dreary regions can rediscover them. They are left
amid the wastes of desolation; they are sunk like a stone into the depths of the vast
ocean of infinite love. They are lost sight of by man; the very devils of hell cannot
rediscover them; the angels find them obliterated from their view, and God Himself
has turned His back upon them, and left them in the land of separation.1 [Note: W.
H. M. H. Aitken.]
“Now have I won a marvel and a Truth;”
So spake the soul and trembled, “dread and ruth
Together mixed, a sweet and bitter core
Closed in one rind; for I did sin of yore,
But this (so said I oft) was long ago;
So put it from me far away, but, lo!
With Thee is neither After nor Before,
O Lord, and clear within the noon-light set
Of one illimitable Present, yet
Thou lookest on my fault as it were now.
So will I mourn and humble me; yet Thou
Art not as man that oft forgives a wrong
138

139. Because he half forgets it, Time being strong
To wear the crimson of guilt’s stain away;
For Thou, forgiving, dost so in the Day
That shows it clearest, in the boundless Sea
Of Mercy and Atonement, utterly
Casting our pardoned trespasses behind,
No more remembered, or to come in mind;
Set wide from us as East from West away:
So now this bitter turns to solace kind;
And I will comfort me that once of old
A deadly sorrow struck me, and its cold
Runs through me still; but this was long ago.
My grief is dull through age, and friends outworn,
And wearied comforters have long forborne
To sit and weep beside me: Lord, yet Thou
Dost look upon my pang as it were now!”1 [Note: Dora Greenwell.]
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:22
Then the goat went forth, bearing upon him all their iniquities. The slain goat had
symbolized and ceremonially wrought full atonement or covering of sins; but in
order to impress upon the mind of the nation a joyful sense of entire liberation from
the burden of sin, the second symbol of the disappearing goat is used; so that not
only sin, but the consciousness and the fear of the taint and presence of sin, might be
taken away from the cleansed and delivered people. The goat is to bear the iniquities
of the people unto a land not inhabited. The latter words—in the original, eretz
gezerah—would be more correctly translated, a laud cut off, that is, completely
isolated from the surrounding country by some barrier of rock or torrent, which
would make it impossible for the goat to come back again. Thus the sins were utterly
lost, as though they had never been, and they could not return to the sanctified
people. The Hebrew word gazar, to cut (1 Kings 3:25; Psalms 136:18), is represented
139

140. in Arabic by jazara, and the substantive gezerah by jaziruh, which means an island,
or an area surrounded by rivers. The word is still in use in countries where Arabic
is spoken, as the designation of a district divided from the neighbouring territories
by rivers cutting it off, and making it a sort of island or peninsula. Into such a
district as this, the man who led the goat was to let him go. In later times, contrary
to the spirit of the Mosaic appointment, the goat was pushed over a projecting ledge
of rock, and so killed, a device of man clumsily introduced for the purpose of
perfecting a symbolism of Divine appointment. It was more in accordance with the
original institution that "the arrival of the goat in the wilderness was immediately
telegraphed by the waving of flags, from station to station, till a few minutes after its
occurrence it was known in the temple, and whispered from ear to ear, that the goat
had borne upon him all their iniquities into a land not inhabited" (Edersheim,
'Temple Service'). Both the goat that was sacrificed and the goat that served as
remover of sins typified Christ. The first presents him to our faith as the Victim on
the cross, the other as the Sin-bearer on whom the Lord laid "the iniquity of us all"
(Isaiah 53:4; cf. 2 Corinthians 5:21; Galatians 3:13). "The reason for making use of
two animals is to be found purely in the physical impossibility of combining all
features that had to be set forth in the sin offering in one animal" (Keil).
23 “Then Aaron is to go into the tent of meeting
and take off the linen garments he put on before
he entered the Most Holy Place, and he is to leave
them there.
GILL, "And Aaron shall come into the tabernacle of the congregation,....
Having been into the most holy place a fourth time, as the Jews say, to fetch out the
censer and the incense cup; wherefore the Jewish writers observe, that this verse is not
in its proper place; so Jarchi from the Rabbins says, the whole section is in its order,
excepting this, which was after the sacrifice of his burnt offering, and the burnt offering
of the people; and the burning the inwards of the bullock and the goat, which were done
without in the golden garments; and then he dipped himself, and washed his hands and
feet, and stripped and put on the white garments, and went in to fetch the incense cup
and the censer, with which he offered in the inmost place (the holy of holies):
and shall put off the linen garments which he put on when he went into the
holy place; the holy of holies, that is, as Jarchi interprets it, after he had brought it (the
140

141. censer) out, then he clothed himself with the golden garments for the daily evening
sacrifice; and this was the order of the services (on the day of atonement); the daily
morning sacrifice (was performed) in the golden garments; the service of the bullock and
of the goat, and the incense of the censer, in the white garments; and his ram, and the
ram of the people, and some of the additions, in the golden garments; and the bringing
out of the incense cup and the censer in the white garments; and the rest of the
additions, and the daily evening sacrifice, and the incense of the temple, on the inward
altar, in golden garments; and the order of the Scripture, according to the services, so it
was:
and shall leave them there; in one of the chambers of the tabernacle, as afterwards,
in the temple, where they were laid up, never to be used more, as say the Jewish writers,
Ben Gersom, and others; hence we learn, says Jarchi, that they were obliged to be laid
up, and he, the high priest, might not minister in these four garments on another day of
atonement.
JAMISON 23-28, "Aaron shall come into the tabernacle of the
congregation, and shall put off the linen garments — On the dismissal of the
scapegoat, the high priest prepared for the important parts of the service which still
remained; and for the performance of these he laid aside his plain linen clothes, and,
having bathed himself in water, he assumed his pontifical dress. Thus gorgeously attired,
he went to present the burnt offerings which were prescribed for himself and the people,
consisting of the two rams which had been brought with the sin offerings, but reserved
till now. The fat was ordered to be burnt upon the altar; the rest of the carcasses to be
cut down and given to some priestly attendants to burn without the camp, in conformity
with the general law for the sin offerings (Lev_4:8-12; Lev_8:14-17). The persons
employed in burning them, as well as the conductor of the scapegoat, were obliged to
wash their clothes and bathe their flesh in water before they were allowed to return into
the camp.
K&D 23-25, "After the living goat had been sent away, Aaron was to go into the
tabernacle, i.e., the holy place of the dwelling, and there take off his white clothes and lay
them down, i.e., put them away, because they were only to be worn in the performance
of the expiatory ritual of this day, and then bathe his body in the holy place, i.e., in the
court, in the laver between the altar and the door of the dwelling, probably because the
act of laying the sins upon the goat rendered him unclean. He was then to put on his
clothes, i.e., the coloured state-dress of the high priest, and to offer in this the burnt-
offerings, for an atonement for himself and the nation (see Lev_1:4), and to burn the fat
portions of the sin-offerings upon the altar.
COFFMAN, "Verse 23
"And Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting, and shall put off the linen
garments, which he put on when he went into the holy place, and shall leave them
there: and he shall bathe his flesh in water in a holy place, and put on his garments,
and come forth, and offer his burnt-offering and the burnt-offering of the people,
141

142. and make atonement for himself, and for the people. And the fat of the sin-offering
shall he burn upon the altar. And he that letteth go the goat for Azazel shall wash
his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp.
And the bullock of the sin-offering, and the goat of the sin-offering, whose blood
was brought in to make atonement in the holy place, shall be carried forth without
the camp; and they shall burn in the fire their skins, and their flesh, and their dung.
And he that burneth them shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and
afterward he shall come into the camp."
The "mopping up" activities after the high ceremonies of the day ended are in view
here. The orders were for Aaron to go ahead and complete the usual ritual for the
sin-offerings, already slain that their blood might be used in the atonement ritual,
and that the carcasses should be carried outside the camp and burned. That the
Atonement services were over is indicated by the fact that Aaron bathed himself and
changed to the formal regalia of his office. Other procedures in the final activities
included the ceremonial washing and changing garments of the men who carried out
the burning of the carcasses, and of the person charged with loosing the goat in a
distant wilderness.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 23
(23) Shall come into the tabernacle of the congregation.—Better, shall come into the
tent of meeting. This was the fourth time that the high priest entered into the Holy
of Holies on the Day of Atonement. The object of his going into the most Holy was to
fetch the censer and the incense cup which he had left between the two staves (see
Leviticus 16:12). To do this he had again to bathe, which always accompanied the
change of garments, and to put on his white robes. As it was no part of the actual
service, but was simply a necessary act subsequent to the service, it is not fully
described in the text. This was the last act on the Day of Atonement which the high
priest performed in his white robes.
And shall leave them there.—The robes were now deposited in a chamber in the
sanctuary especially set apart for this purpose, and the high priest was never
allowed to minister in them again.
PETT, "Verse 23
“And Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting, and shall put off the linen
garments, which he put on when he went into the holy place, and shall leave them
there,”
The work of atonement having been completed for another year, Aaron divests
himself of the holy garments, which remain in the Holy Place. These are too holy to
leave that place.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:23. He shall put off the linen garments — Having finished
142

143. the solemn expiatory and deprecatory offering, he was to put off those garments
which were appropriated to this service, and to leave them there.
And Maimonides and others say they were never to be used more, either by him or
any one else, and that new ones were prepared every year.
WHEDON, "23. Put off the linen garments — The distinctive work of atonement
having now been accomplished, the garments of humiliation are laid aside and the
gorgeous and costly robes of the high priest are put on. Thus Jesus, after saying “It
is finished,” laid aside the robes of mortal flesh soon to put on the vesture of a
glorified humanity.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:23 And Aaron shall come into the tabernacle of the
congregation, and shall put off the linen garments, which he put on when he went
into the holy [place], and shall leave them there:
Ver. 23. Shall leave them there.] As afterwards the priests did, in some of the holy
chambers about the sanctuary. [Ezekiel 44:16]
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:23, Leviticus 16:24
In later times another scene was interposed at this point. The high priest, having
sent away the man with the goat, recited the passages of Scripture which
commanded the observance of the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16:1-34; Leviticus
23:27-32; Numbers 29:7-11), and offered prayers in which the people might
mentally join. Then he went back into the tabernacle of the congregation (not into
the holy of holies), and, as all the special atoning and purifying services of the day
were now over, he there took off his linen dress, and put it away; and after bathing
in the holy place, that is, in that part of the sanctuary set apart for that purpose, he
put on his ordinary high-priestly garments, and sacrificed first a goat for a sin
offering (Numbers 29:16), next his own burnt offering of a ram, and then the burnt
offering of the people, which was also a ram and other victims (Ibid.).
24 He shall bathe himself with water in the
sanctuary area and put on his regular garments.
Then he shall come out and sacrifice the burnt
offering for himself and the burnt offering for the
people, to make atonement for himself and for the
143

144. people.
GILL, "And he shall wash his flesh with water in the holy place,.... In the court
of the tabernacle of the congregation, where, as Aben Ezra says, they spread fine linen
for him; Jarchi says, it was a place on the roof of the house of Parvah, where all the
dippings and washings were made, except the first; See Gill on Lev_16:4; and this
washing was no other than the dipping of his whole body in water; and if our Lord was
baptized on this day, as some have thought, before observed, whose baptism was by
dipping, Mat_3:16; there will appear in this a great likeness between the type and the
antitype:
and put on his garments and come forth; put on his golden garments, and come
out of the place where he had washed himself, to the court, where was the altar of burnt
offering: all which may be an emblem of Christ's putting off the pure and spotless
garment of the flesh, in which he appeared in a low estate, and made atonement for sin;
and of his burial, which the washing of the flesh may point at, being what was used of
the dead, and which washing in baptism is a figure of; and of his resurrection from the
dead, when God gave him glory, and he appeared in a glorious body, signified by his
golden garments put on again:
and offer his burnt offering, and the burnt offering of the people; his ram, and
the people's ram, and the bullock of the people, and their seven lambs, as it is written,
Num_29:8; so Aben Ezra, first his own, and then the people's, which order was before
observed in the sin offerings:
and make an atonement for himself, and for the people; which though properly
made by the sin offerings, and the carrying the blood of them into the most holy place,
yet these were the completing of it, being the last of the services peculiar to the day of
atonement: the service performed by the high priest after the sending away the goat into
the wilderness was this; he read this "sixteenth" chapter of Leviticus, and Lev_23:27, if
he read in linen garments, he washed his hands and his feet, he stripped himself, went
down and dipped himself, and came up and wiped himself; then they brought him the
golden garments, and he put them on, and washed his hands and his feet, and went out
and offered his ram, and the people's ram, and the seven perfect lambs of a year old;
then he washed his hands and his feet, and stripped and went down and dipped, and
came up and wiped himself; then they brought him the white garments, and he put them
on, and washed his hands and his feet, and went into the holy of holies to fetch out the
incense cup and the censer; then he washed his hands and his feet, and stripped, and
went down and dipped, and came up and wiped himself; then they brought him the
golden garments, and he put them on, and he washed his hands and his feet, and went in
(to the holy place) to offer the evening incense, and to him the lamps; and then he
washed his hands and his feet, and stripped; and they brought him his own garments
(what he usually wore when out of service), and he put them on; and they accompanied
him to his house, where he made a feast for his friends, because he was come out of the
sanctuary in safety (o): where, it seems, sometimes some died, and others became sick
by getting cold through frequent shifting of their clothes and washing, and wearing thin
144

145. linen garments.
COKE, "Leviticus 16:24. He shall wash his flesh with water in the holy place— Not
only the high-priest, but the person who bore the goat into the wilderness (Leviticus
16:26.) was to wash, after touching an animal which they judged so polluted; and
which, as being a substitute for a sinful people, none could touch without
contracting some pollution. And hence the words καθαρμα, περικαθαρμα, which
properly signify a piacular deprecatory sacrifice, were applied to denote the vilest
and most contemptible objects: in which sense St. Paul, speaking of the ill usage
which he and his brethren met with in the world, says, we are περικαθαρματα; as
despicable in the eyes of the heathen world, as those condemned persons who were
offered up by way of public expiation, 1 Corinthians 4:13. Porphyry observes the
same custom of washing among the heathens, who, in their deprecatory sacrifices,
permitted no man, who had meddled with them, to come into the city, or to go into
his own house, who had not first washed his clothes and his body in some river or
spring water.
And put on his garments— The solemn and deprecatory offering being finished, the
high-priest was to put off the linen garments, Leviticus 16:23. (which, as we have
observed on Leviticus 16:4 were emblematic of the occasion) and to leave them in
the tabernacle; never more to be worn, according to Maimonides and others; after
which he was to put on the garments peculiar to his office; and in these to offer the
burnt-offering for himself and the people; hereby signifying his own, as well as
their, total consecration to God: and thus the atonement was completed.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 24
(24) And he shall wash his flesh.—That is, immerse his whole body. The baptistery,
where the high priest performed these ablutions, was on the roof of a building in the
sacred precincts. According to the authorities and practice during the second
Temple the act described in this verse preceded the one ordered in the foregoing
verse. The burnt offering, both for himself and for the people, the high priest
offered in the golden garments. These he changed for the white robes when he
afterwards went into the Holy of Holies to fetch the censer and the incense cup. The
sacrifice consisted first of his own ram, then the ram of the people, and lastly the
bullock of the people, and their seven lambs. (Comp. Numbers 29:8).
PETT, "Verse 24
“And he shall bathe his flesh in water in a holy place, and put on his garments, and
come forth, and offer his whole burnt offering and the whole burnt offering of the
people, and make atonement for himself and for the people.”
Then he must wash his flesh thoroughly in water in a holy place. The special
holiness which he has carried with him must be removed before he can again have
145

146. dealings with men. This would probably be done in a specially set off place in the
court of the sanctuary made accessible directly from the Holy Place so that his
nakedness could not be seen. Then he puts on his priestly garments. One more he is
the representative of the people before Yahweh. After which he offers up the whole
burnt offerings, both for himself and for the people. This seals their oneness with
God. They are renewed as His covenant people, rededicated and in submission.
Atonement is made both for himself and the people.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:24. He shall wash in the holy place — That is, in the court
of the tabernacle, where stood the altar of burnt-offering, and the sacred laver. Here
he was to wash or sprinkle his whole body, that he might purify himself after he had
touched the goat which bare their iniquities, just as the man that carried him into
the wilderness was to wash afterward. This ceremony signified that the creature was
made so polluted and abominable by being a substitute for sinners, that none could
touch it without contracting some pollution. And put on his garments — The
garments peculiar to his office, wherein he officiated on other days. And this change
of his garments was not without cause. For the common priestly garments were
more proper for him in the former part of his ministration, because then he was to
appear before the Lord in the most holy place, to humble himself, and make
atonement for his own and for the people’s sins, and therefore his meanest attire
was most fit. And the high-priestly garments were most proper for the latter part of
his work, which was of another nature.
WHEDON, "23. Put off the linen garments — The distinctive work of atonement
having now been accomplished, the garments of humiliation are laid aside and the
gorgeous and costly robes of the high priest are put on. Thus Jesus, after saying “It
is finished,” laid aside the robes of mortal flesh soon to put on the vesture of a
glorified humanity.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:24 And he shall wash his flesh with water in the holy place,
and put on his garments, and come forth, and offer his burnt offering, and the burnt
offering of the people, and make an atonement for himself, and for the people.
Ver. 24. He shall wash his flesh.] See what this taught them and us. [Hebrews 10:22]
That Epistle to the Hebrews is an excellent commentary upon this Book of Leviticus.
25 He shall also burn the fat of the sin offering on
the altar.
146

147. GILL, "And the fat of the sin offering shall he burn upon the altar. The brazen
altar of burnt offering, and so says Jarchi, on the outward altar; for of the inward (i.e.
the altar of incense) it is written, ye shall not offer upon it strange incense, nor a burnt
offering, nor a meat offering; and this fat he explains to be what was on the inwards of
both the bullock and the goat; and so says Aben Ezra, the fat of the bullock for the sin
offering, and the fat of the goat for a sin offering, and also the fat of the kid of the goat,
which, was a sin offering for the priest, Num_29:11; this fat was burnt at the same time
the burnt offerings were offered in Lev_16:24.
ELLICOTT, " (25) And the fat of the sin offering.—That is, the fat of the inwards
of both the bullock (see Leviticus 16:6) and the goat (see Leviticus 16:15), which
constituted the sin offering, as well as the fat of the other goat, which was the
priest’s sin offering, was to be burnt upon the brazen altar of burnt offering in the
courtyard. (See Leviticus 4:8-10.)
26 “The man who releases the goat as a scapegoat
must wash his clothes and bathe himself with
water; afterward he may come into the camp.
BARNES, "Both he who led away the goat, and he who burned the parts of the sin-
offerings had to purify themselves. They who went out of the camp during a religious
solemnity incurred uncleanness; hence, the need of purification.
CLARKE, "He that let go the goat - shall wash, etc. - Not only the person who
led him away, but the priest who consecrated him, was reputed unclean, because the
goat himself was unclean, being considered as bearing the sins of the whole
congregation. On this account both the priest and the person who led him to the
wilderness were obliged to wash their clothes and bathe themselves, before they could
come into the camp.
GILL, "And he that let go the goat for the scapegoat,.... Or unto Azazel; who or
what Azazel is; see Gill on Lev_16:10 and See Gill on Lev_16:21; for the goat and Azazel
147

148. are different, not the same, nor to be confounded as they are in our version:
shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water; in forty seahs of water,
according to the Targum of Jonathan; so unclean was this person reckoned by what he
had to do with the goat sent away by him; which, in a typical and ceremonial sense, had
all the sins of the people of Israel on it: and he and his garments were defiled as soon as
he could be said to be letting go; and that was, as Gersom says, as soon as he was out of
the city; for as long as he was in the city he was in the place from whence the motion was
made, but as soon as he was out of it he was in the way, and then he began to be in that
motion, and might be then called, "he that let him go": and from that time the clothes he
had on were defiled; according to the Misnah (p), from the time he was got without the
walls of Jerusalem:
and afterwards come into the camp; of Israel, while in the wilderness, and into the
city in later times, and so into the sanctuary, and enjoyed all civil and religious privileges
as another man: and something like this obtained among the Heathens, as has been
observed by many learned men, particularly out of Porphyry (q); who says, all divines
agree in this, that such sacrifices as were offered for averting evils were not to be
touched, but such needed purifications; nor might any such an one go into the city; nor
into his own house, before he had washed his clothes and his body in a river or in a
fountain: all this may be an emblem of those who were concerned in having Christ
without the gates of Jerusalem to be crucified, and who afterwards, being sensible of
their sin, not only had forgiveness of it and were washed from it in the blood of Christ,
but, being baptized in water, were admitted into the church of God, Act_2:37; and in
general may show the nature of sin, that such who have anything to do with any who
have it on them, though only in a ceremonial way, are defiled by it, and need washing;
and also the imperfection of ceremonial rites and sacrifices to take away sin.
K&D, "The man who took the goat into the desert, and those who burned the two sin-
offerings outside the camp (see at Lev_4:11, Lev_4:21), had also to wash their clothes
and bathe their bodies before they returned to the camp, because they had been defiled
by the animals laden with sin.
CALVIN, "26.And he that let the goat go. Since this goat was the outcast ( κάθαπμα)
of God’s wrath, and devoted to His curse, he who led it away is commanded to wash
his person and his clothes, as if he were a partaker in its defilement. By this symbol
the faithful were reminded how very detestable is their iniquity, so that they might,
be affected with increasing dread, whenever they considered what they deserved.
For when they saw a man forbidden to enter the camp because he was polluted by
simply touching the goat, they must needs reflect how much wider was the
alienation between God and themselves, when they bore upon them an uncleanness
not contracted elsewhere, but procured by their own sin. The same may be said of
him who burned the skin, the flesh, and the dung of the bullock and the goat. We
have elsewhere seen that these remnants were carried out of the camp in token of
abomination. And on this head Christ’s inestimable love towards us shines more
brightly, who did not disdain to go out of the city that He might be made an outcast
148

149. (rejectamentum) for us, and might undergo the curse due to us.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 26
(26) And he that let go the goat for the scapegoat.—Better, And he that leadeth away
the goat to Âzazel (see Leviticus 16:10). As the messenger who conducted the sin-
laden animal to the author of sin contracted defilement by the impurity which the
victim carried away, he had both to wash his clothes and immerse his whole body in
water before he was admitted into the camp. During the second Temple he remained
in the last booth, which was a mile from Jerusalem, till sundown, when he was re-
admitted into the camp.
PETT, "Verse 26
“And he who lets go the goat for Azazel shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in
water, and afterward he shall come into the camp.”
Meanwhile the man who let the live goat go in the wilderness must wash his clothes,
wash his flesh thoroughly in water, and may then return to the camp. Whether this
is to wash off the taint of sin borne by the goat, or the desert dirt and earthiness, or
to wash of holiness emanating from this most holy of offerings (compare Leviticus
16:28) we are not told. But in fact we may see it that all of his part in the ceremony
is to be washed off, with all its ramifications. The he-goat has taken all with it.
Nothing must return to the camp.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:26 And he that let go the goat for the scapegoat shall wash
his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward come into the camp.
Ver. 26. Shall wash his clothes.] To show, (1.) That it was for our sins that Christ
suffered; (2.) That all that partake of his benefits must wash their hearts from
wickedness. [Jeremiah 4:14; 2 Corinthians 5:15; 2 Corinthians 7:1]
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:26
The man that let go the goat which served for a remover of sins is to wash his
clothes, and bathe his flesh before he comes into the camp. This is not ordered on
account of any special defilement attaching to the scapegoat, but only because it had
been the symbolical sin-bearer, and therefore conveyed legal uncleanness by its
touch. The man who bore the flesh of the ether goat to be burnt had to do exactly
the same thing (Leviticus 16:25).
27 The bull and the goat for the sin offerings,
149

150. whose blood was brought into the Most Holy
Place to make atonement, must be taken outside
the camp; their hides, flesh and intestines are to
be burned up.
BARNES, "Lev_16:27
Shall burn in the fire - i. e., consume in the fire, not burn sacrificially. See Lev_1:9.
GILL, "And the bullock for the sin offering, and the goat for the sin
offering,.... The one for Aaron and his family, the other for the people of Israel, of
which see Lev_16:5,
whose blood was brought in to make an atonement in the holy place; the holy
of holies, where it was brought and sprinkled, as directed inLev_16:14,
shall one carry forth without the camp; by command, as Aben Ezra observes; by
the order of the high priest; and, perhaps, more than one was employed to carry out
those carcasses, they being too large for one man, and as it seems from a following
clause; and the Targum of Jonathan is,
"they shall be carried out on staves by the hands of the junior priests;
so Jarchi says (r), four men carried two staves, two before and two behind, and they
went staff by staff, and the bullock and the goat were upon them, and they carried them
one upon another: this was done after the high priest had done to them what was
necessary; for so it is said, he went to the bullock and to the goat that were to be burnt;
he ripped them up and took out their inwards, and put them in a bowl, and offered them
on the top of the altar; and cut them with cuttings (made incisions into the flesh of them,
but did not part it), and ordered them to be carried out to the place of burning, which
was without the camp of Israel, and afterwards without the city of Jerusalem: the
mystery of this, and the application of it to Christ, setting forth the nature and place of
Christs sufferings, are fully and largely expressed by the apostle in Heb_13:11,
and they shall burn in the fire their skins, and their flesh, and their dung;
the priests, as Aben Ezra; for there were more than one concerned, as in carrying them
out, so in the burning of them: the high priest was not concerned in it, for while these
were burning he was reading, as observed on Lev_16:24; so that he that saw, the high
priest when he was reading, saw not the bullock and the goat when they were burnt; and
he that saw the bullock and the goat burnt, saw not the high priest when he read; not
because it was not lawful, but because the way was distant, and the business of both was
done together (s): this was done in a place called the place of ashes (t), where the ashes
150

151. of the altar of burnt offering were carried; See Gill on Lev_4:11 andSee Gill on Lev_4:12.
ELLICOTT, " (27) And the bullock.—That is, the bodies of the sin offerings for the
priests and the people (see Leviticus 16:5-6; Leviticus 16:9; Leviticus 16:11), whose
blood the high priest carried into the Holy of Holies. (See Leviticus 16:14-15, with
Leviticus 4:11-12.)
Shall one carry forth.—Better shall be carried forth. During the second Temple four
men carried the carcases upon two poles to the place set aside outside Jerusalem for
burning. (See Leviticus 4:11.) Hence the ancient Palestinian Targum translates it,
“they shall be carried out on poles by the hands of the younger priests.” As has
already been remarked, the priest performed this part of the service immediately
after the goat was dispatched by the messenger to the wilderness. Whilst the victims
were being burned outside the camp the high priest read in the women’s court the
appointed lessons for the Day of Atonement (viz., Leviticus 23:26; Numbers 29:7-11)
in the presence of the congregation, who were all standing, and at the conclusion of
the reading pronounced the eight benedictions (1) on the Divine Law, (2) on the
public service, (3) on confession, (4) forgiveness of sins, (5) on Jerusalem, (6) on the
Temple, (7) on Israel, and (8) on the priesthood.
PETT, "Verse 27
“And the bull ox of the purification for sin offering, and the goat of the purification
for sin offering, whose blood was brought in to make atonement in the holy place,
shall be carried forth without the camp; and they shall burn in the fire their skins,
and their flesh, and their dung.”
Finally the remains of both purification for sin offerings, skins, flesh and dung,
must be taken outside the camp and burned. We can assume that this is ‘in a clean
place’ as in 4:12, 21 which deal with ox bulls offered as purification for sin offerings
on behalf of the Priest and the whole people. They are not suffused with sin. They
are extremely holy. Through them God has done His merciful work and they are
offered back to Him
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:27 And the bullock [for] the sin offering, and the goat [for]
the sin offering, whose blood was brought in to make atonement in the holy [place],
shall [one] carry forth without the camp; and they shall burn in the fire their skins,
and their flesh, and their dung.
Ver. 27. Without the camp.] See Hebrews 13:11; Hebrews 13:14.
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:27, Leviticus 16:28
As the blood of the bullock and the goat which had been offered in the special
expiatory sacrifices of the day had been carried within the sanctuary (Leviticus
16:14, Leviticus 16:15), their bodies had to be burnt without the camp (Leviticus
151

152. 4:12). Our Lord being the antitype, not only of Aaron as the Great High Priest, but
also of the expiatory sacrifices as the Great Sin Offering, the author of the Epistle to
the Hebrews notices that the fact of Christ's having "suffered without the camp"
serves as an indication that his blood had in its atoning effects been carried by him
into heaven, the antitype of the holy of holies (Hebrews 13:12). The flesh of the other
goat, offered as a sin offering, would have been eaten by the priests in the evening,
at a sacrificial meal (Leviticus 10:17, Leviticus 10:18).
28 The man who burns them must wash his
clothes and bathe himself with water; afterward
he may come into the camp.
GILL, "And he that burneth them shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh
in water,.... In forty seahs of water, as the Targum of Jonathan; that is, everyone of
those that burnt them, as Aben Ezra observes; for these being sin offerings, and had a
connection with the sins of men, for whom they were offered, the persons concerned in
the carrying and burning of them were equally defiled, and needed washing, as the man
that led and let go the goat into the wilderness:
and afterwards he shall come into the camp; and have the liberty of conversation
with men in civil and religious things, but not till evening; so long he was defiled; and
according to the Misnah (u) from the time they got without the walls of the court; and
after washing and bathing, and when the evening was come, they were clean; and might
go where they pleased,
PETT, "Verse 28
“And he who burns them shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and
afterward he shall come into the camp.”
Then the one who burns them has to wash his clothes, wash himself thoroughly,
after which he can return to the camp. Here we must almost certainly see the need
to wash off the contact with holiness which must not be carried into the camp
(compare Leviticus 16:24).
152

153. 29 “This is to be a lasting ordinance for you: On
the tenth day of the seventh month you must deny
yourselves[c] and not do any work—whether
native-born or a foreigner residing among you—
BARNES, "Seventh month, on the tenth day - The month Ethanim or Tisri, as
being the seventh in the Sacred year, has been called the sabbatical month. On the first
day was celebrated the Feast of Trumpets Lev_23:24, the tenth day was the Day of
Atonement, and on the fourteenth day the Feast of tabernacles commenced (Lev_23:24
note; Exo_23:16).
Afflict your souls - The old term for fasting; but its meaning evidently embraces,
not only abstinence from food, but that penitence and humiliation which give scope and
purpose to the outward act of fasting. The Day of Atonement was the only public fast
commanded by the Law of Moses. See further directions in Lev_23:27-32. On fasts
observed in later times, see Zec_8:19, and margin reference.
A stranger that sojourneth among you - Rather, the foreigner who dwelleth
among you. See Exo_20:10 note. The meaning is, one of foreign blood, who dwelt with
the Israelites, had abjured false gods, and had become familiarly known to his
neighbors, e. g. the Kenites (Jdg_4:11, etc.); the Gibeonites Josh. 9; and a considerable
portion of the “mixed multitude” (compare Exo_12:38, Exo_12:48). As the foreigner had
the blessing and protection of the Law he was bound to obey its statutes.
CLARKE, "The seventh month, on the tenth day of the month - The
commandment of fasting, and sanctifying this tenth day, is again repeated Lev_
23:27-32; but in the last verse it is called the ninth day at even, because the Jewish day
began with the evening. The sacrifices which the day of atonement should have more
than other days, are mentioned Num_29:7-11; and the jubilee which was celebrated
every fiftieth year was solemnly proclaimed by sound of trumpet on this tenth day, Lev_
25:8, Lev_25:9. A shadow, says Mr. Ainsworth, of that acceptable year of the Lord, the
year of freedom, which Christ has proclaimed by the trumpet of his Gospel, Luk_
4:18-21; 2Co_6:2. This seventh month was Tisri, and answers to a part of our September
and October. It was the seventh of the sacred and the first month of the civil year.
The great day of atonement, and the sacrifices, rites, and ceremonies prescribed for it,
were commanded to be solemnized by the Jews through the whole of their dispensation,
and as long as God should acknowledge them for his people: yet in the present day
scarcely a shadow of these things remains; there is no longer a scape-goat, nor a goat for
sacrifice, provided by them in any place. They are sinners, and they are without an
atonement. How strange it is that they do not see that the essence of their religion is
gone, and that consequently God has thrown them entirely out of covenant with himself!
153

154. The true expiation, the Christ crucified, they refuse to receive, and are consequently
without temple, altar, scape-goat, atonement, or any means of salvation! The state of the
Gentile world is bad, but that of the Jews is doubly deplorable. Their total excision
excepted, wrath is come upon them to the uttermost. What a proof is this of the truth of
the predictions in their own law, and of those in the Gospel of Christ! Who, with the
Jews and the Bible before his eyes, can doubt the truth of that Bible as a Divine
revelation? Had this people been extinct, we might have doubted whether there were
ever a people on the earth that acknowledged such a law, or observed such ordinances;
but the people, their law, and their prophets are still in being, and all proclaim what God
has wrought, and that he has now ceased to work among them, because they have
refused to receive and profit by the great atonement; and yet he preserves them alive,
and in a state of complete separation from all the people of the earth in all places of their
dispersion! How powerfully does the preservation of the Jews as a distinct people bear
testimony at once to the truth of their own law which they acknowledge, and the Gospel
of Christ which they reject!
2. But while the Jews sit in thick darkness, because of the veil that is on their hearts,
though the light of the glory of God is shining all around them, but not into them
because of their unbelief; in what state are those who profess to see their unbelief and
obstinacy, acknowledge the truth of the New Testament, and yet are living without an
atonement applied to their souls for the removal of their iniquities, transgressions, and
sins? These are also in the gall of bitterness, and bond of iniquity. An all-sufficient Savior
held out in the New Testament, can do them no more good than a scape-goat and day of
atonement described in the law can do the Jews. As well may a man imagine that the
word bread can nourish his body, as that the name Christ can save his soul. Both must
be received and applied in order that the man may live.
3. The Jews prepared themselves to get benefit from this most solemn ordinance by
the deepest humiliations. According to their canons, they were obliged to abstain from
all meat and drink - from the bath - from anointing themselves - to go barefoot - and to
be in a state of perfect continency. He who is likely to get benefit for his soul through the
redemption that is in Christ, must humble himself under the mighty hand of God,
confess his iniquity, abstain from every appearance of evil, and believe on him who died
for his offenses, and rose again for his justification. The soul that seeks not shall not
find, even under the Gospel of Christ.
GILL, "And this shall be a statute for ever unto you,.... As long as the Aaronic
priesthood was in being, and the Levitical dispensation lasted, until: the true Messiah
came and put an end to all these rites and ceremonies; until that time this service was to
be performed by the high priest in succession every year:
that in the seventh month; the month Tisri, as the Targum of Jonathan explains it,
which answers to part of our September, and was the seventh month from the month
Abib or Nisan, answering to part of our March; which was appointed the first month,
upon the Israelites coming out of Egypt in that month, and for that reason; otherwise
this seventh month, or Tisri, was the first month of the year before, and, indeed,
continued to be so notwithstanding, with respect to things civil:
on the tenth day of the month; on which day, the Jews say (w), Moses descended
154

155. from the mount the second time, with the tables of the law, and the tidings of
forgiveness of the sin of the calf; wherefore this day is thought to be appointed a day of
affliction and humiliation for that and all other sins, and for the atonement of them, and
on this day the jubilee trumpet was blown, Lev_25:9,
ye shall afflict your souls; not only by humiliation of the heart for sin, and by
repentance of it, and by turning from their evil ways, but by corporeal fasting, which is
chiefly meant by the affliction of their souls; so the Targum of Jonathan explains it, by
abstaining from eating and from drinking, and from the use of baths, and from
anointing, and from the use of shoes, and of the marriage bed; and so it is said in the
Misnah (x), on the day of atonement, eating and drinking, and washing, and anointing,
and putting on of the shoes, and the use of the bed, are forbidden; whoever eats the
quantity of a gross date with its kernels, or drinks a mouthful (as much as he can hold in
his jaws), is guilty: they do not afflict children on the day of atonement, but they train
them up a year or two before, that they may be inured to the command; hence this day,
in Act_27:9 is called "the fast":
and do no work at all; no bodily work, for it was in that respect a sabbath, as it is
afterwards called; the Jewish canon is, he that ate and did any work was guilty of two
sins, or was obliged to two sin offerings (y):
whether it be one of your own country, or a stranger that sojourneth among
you; whether a native of the land of Israel, that was born there, and of parents who were
Israelites, or one that was a proselyte to the Jewish religion, a proselyte of righteousness,
as Ben Gersom interprets it; this law concerning fasting and abstinence from all servile
work on the day of atonement was binding on the one as on the other,
HENRY 29-34, "I. We have here some additional directions in reference to this great
solemnity, particularly,
1. The day appointed for this solemnity. It must be observed yearly on the tenth day of
the seventh month, Lev_16:29. The seventh had been reckoned the first month, till God
appointed that the month in which the children of Israel came out of Egypt should
thenceforward be accounted and called the first month. Some have fancied that this
tenth day of the seventh month was the day of the year on which our first parents fell,
and that it was kept as a fast in remembrance of their fall. Dr. Lightfoot computes that
this was the day on which Moses came the last time down from the mount, when he
brought with him the renewed tables, and the assurances of God's being reconciled to
Israel, and his face shone: that day must be a day of atonement throughout their
generations; for the remembrance of God's forgiving them their sin about the golden calf
might encourage them to hope that, upon their repentance, he would forgive them all
trespasses.
2. The duty of the people on this day. (1.) They must rest from all their labours: It shall
be a sabbath of rest, Lev_16:31. The work of the day was itself enough, and a good day's
work if it was done well; therefore they must do no other work at all. The work of
humiliation for sin requires such a close application of mind, and such a fixed
engagement of the whole man, as will not allow us to turn aside to any other work. The
day of atonement seems to be that sabbath spoken of by the prophet (Isa_58:13), for it is
the same with the fast spoken of in the verses before. (2.) They must afflict their souls.
They must refrain from all bodily refreshments and delights, in token of inward
155

156. humiliation and contrition of soul for their sins. They all fasted on this day from food
(except the sick and children), and laid aside their ornaments, and did not anoint
themselves, as Daniel, Dan_10:3, Dan_10:12. David chastened his soul with fasting,
Psa_35:13. And it signified the mortifying of sin and turning from it, loosing the bands
of wickedness, Isa_58:6, Isa_58:7. The Jewish doctors advised that they should not on
that day read those portions of scripture which were proper to affect them with delight
and joy, because it was a day to afflict their souls.
3. The perpetuity of this institution: It shall be a statute for ever, Lev_16:29, Lev_
16:34. It must not be intermitted any year, nor ever let fall till that constitution should be
dissolved, and the type should be superseded by the antitype. As long as we are
continually sinning, we must be continually repenting, and receiving the atonement. The
law of afflicting our souls for sin is a statute for ever, which will continue in force till we
arrive where all tears, even those of repentance, will be wiped from our eyes. The apostle
observes it as an evidence of the insufficiency of the legal sacrifices to take away sin, and
purge the conscience from it, that in them there was a remembrance made of sin every
year, upon the day of atonement, Heb_10:1-3. The annual repetition of the sacrifices
showed that there was in them only a faint and feeble effort towards making atonement;
it could be done effectually only by the offering up of the body of Christ once for all, and
that once was sufficient; that sacrifice needed not to be repeated.
II. Let us see what there was of gospel in all this.
1. Here are typified the two great gospel privileges of the remission of sin and access to
God, both which we owe to the mediation of our Lord Jesus. Here then let us see,
(1.) The expiation of guilt which Christ made for us. He is himself both the maker and
the matter of the atonement; for he is, [1.] The priest, the high priest, that makes
reconciliation for the sins of the people, Heb_2:17. He, and he only, is par negotio - fit
for the work and worthy of the honour: he is appointed by the Father to do it, who
sanctified him, and sent him into the world for this purpose, that God might in him
reconcile the world to himself. He undertook it, and for our sakes sanctified himself, and
set himself apart for it, Joh_17:19. The high priest's frequently bathing himself on this
day, and performing the service of it in fine linen clean and white, signified the holiness
of the Lord Jesus, his perfect freedom from all sin, and his being beautified and adorned
with all grace. No man was to be with the high priest when he made atonement (Lev_
16:17); for our Lord Jesus was to tread the wine-press alone, and of the people there
must be none with him (Isa_63:3); therefore, when he entered upon his sufferings, all
his disciples forsook him and fled, for it any of them had been taken and put to death
with him it would have looked as if they had assisted in making the atonement; none but
thieves, concerning whom there could be no such suspicion, must suffer with him. And
observe what the extent of the atonement was which the high priest made: it was for the
holy sanctuary, for the tabernacle, for the altar, for the priests, and for all the people,
Lev_16:33. Christ's satisfaction is that which atones for the sins both of ministers and
people, the iniquities of our holy (and our unholy) things; the title we have to the
privileges of ordinances, our comfort in them, and benefit by them, are all owing to the
atonement Christ made. But, whereas the atonement which the high priest made
pertained only to the congregation of Israel, Christ is the propitiation, not for their sins
only, that are Jews, but for the sins of the whole Gentile world. And in this also Christ
infinitely excelled Aaron, that Aaron needed to offer sacrifice for his own sin first, of
which he was to make confession upon the head of his sin-offering; but our Lord Jesus
had no sin of his own to answer for. Such a high priest became us, Heb_7:26. And
therefore, when he was baptized in Jordan, whereas others stood in the water confessing
156

157. their sins (Mat_3:6), he went up straightway out of the water (Heb_7:16), having no
sins to confess. [2.] As he is the high priest, so he is the sacrifice with which atonement is
made; for he is all in all in our reconciliation to God. Thus he was prefigured by the two
goats, which both made one offering: the slain goat was a type of Christ dying for our
sins, the scape-goat a type of Christ rising again for our justification. It was directed by
lot, the disposal whereof was of the Lord, which goat should be slain; for Christ was
delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God. First, The atonement
is said to be completed by putting the sins of Israel upon the head of the goat. They
deserved to have been abandoned and sent into a land of forgetfulness, but that
punishment was here transferred to the goat that bore their sins, with reference to which
God is said to have laid upon our Lord Jesus (the substance of all these shadows) the
iniquity of us all (Isa_53:6), and he is said to have borne our sins, even the punishment
of them, in his own body upon the tree, 1Pe_2:24. Thus was he made sin for us, that is, a
sacrifice for sin, 2Co_5:21. He suffered and died, not only for our good, but in our stead,
and was forsaken, and seemed to be forgotten for a time, that we might not be forsaken
and forgotten for ever. Some learned men have computed that our Lord Jesus was
baptized of John in Jordan upon the tenth day of the seventh month, which was the very
day of atonement. Then he entered upon his office as Mediator, and was immediately
driven of the Spirit into the wilderness, a land not inhabited. Secondly, The consequence
of this was that all the iniquities of Israel were carried into a land of forgetfulness. Thus
Christ, the Lamb of God, takes away the sin the of world, by taking it upon himself,
Joh_1:29. And, when God forgives sin, he is said to remember it no more (Heb_8:12), to
cast it behind his back (Isa_38:17), into the depths of the sea (Mic_7:19), and to
separate it as far as the east is from the west, Psa_103:12.
(2.) The entrance into heaven which Christ made for us is here typified by the high
priest's entrance into the most holy place. This the apostle has expounded (Heb_9:7,
etc.), and he shows, [1.] That heaven is the holiest of all, but not of that building, and
that the way into it by faith, hope, and prayer, through a Mediator, was not then so
clearly manifested as it is to us now by the gospel. [2.] That Christ our high priest
entered into heaven at his ascension once for all, and as a public person, in the name of
all his spiritual Israel, and through the veil of his flesh, which was rent for that purpose,
Heb_10:20. [3.] That he entered by his own blood (Heb_9:12), taking with him to
heaven the virtues of the sacrifice he offered on earth, and so sprinkling his blood, as it
were, before the mercy-seat, where it speaks better things than the blood of bulls and
goats could do. Hence he is said to appear in the midst of the throne as a lamb that had
been slain, Rev_5:6. And, though he had no sin of his own to expiate, yet it was by his
own merit that he obtained for himself a restoration to his own ancient glory (Joh_17:4,
Joh_17:5), as well as an eternal redemption for us, Heb_9:12. [4.] The high priest in the
holy place burned incense, which typified the intercession that Christ ever lives to make
for us within the veil, in virtue of his satisfaction. And we could not expect to live, no, not
before the mercy-seat, if it were not covered with the cloud of this incense. Mere mercy
itself will not save us, without the interposition of a Mediator. The intercession of Christ
is there set forth before God as incense, as this incense. And as the high priest interceded
for himself first, then for his household, and then for all Israel, so our Lord Jesus, in the
Joh_17:1 (which was a specimen of the intercession he makes in heaven), recommended
himself first to his Father, then his disciples who were his household, and then all that
should believe on him through their word, as all Israel; and, having thus adverted to the
uses and intentions of his offering, he was immediately seized and crucified, pursuant to
these intentions. [5.] Herein the entry Christ made far exceeded Aaron's, that Aaron
157

158. could not gain admission, no, not for his own sons, into the most holy place; but our
Lord Jesus has consecrated for us also a new and living way into the holiest, so that we
also have boldness to enter, Heb_10:19, Heb_10:20. [6.] The high priest was to come
out again, but our Lord Jesus ever lives, making intercession, and always appears in the
presence of God for us, whither as the forerunner he has for us entered, and where as
agent he continues for us to reside.
2. Here are likewise typified the two great gospel duties of faith and repentance, by
which we are qualified for the atonement, and come to be entitled to the benefit of it. (1.)
By faith we must put our hands upon the head of the offering, relying on Christ as the
Lord our Righteousness, pleading his satisfaction as that which was alone able to atone
for our sins and procure us a pardon. “Thou shalt answer, Lord, for me. This is all I have
to say for myself, Christ has died, yea, rather has risen again; to his grace and
government I entirely submit myself, and in him I receive the atonement,” Rom_5:11.
(2.) By repentance we must afflict our souls; not only fasting for a time from the delights
of the body, but inwardly sorrowing for our sins, and living a life of self-denial and
mortification. We must also make a penitent confession of sin, and this with an eye to
Christ, whom we have pierced, and mourning because of him; and with a hand of faith
upon the atonement, assuring ourselves that, if we confess our sins, God is faithful and
just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
Lastly, In the year of jubilee, the trumpet which proclaimed the liberty was ordered to
be sounded in the close of the day of atonement, Lev_25:9. For the remission of our
debt, release from our bondage, and our return to our inheritance, are all owing to the
mediation and intercession of Jesus Christ. By the atonement we obtain rest for our
souls, and all the glorious liberties of the children of God.
JAMISON 29-34, "this shall be a statute for ever unto you, that in the
seventh month ye shall afflict your souls — This day of annual expiation for all the
sins, irreverences, and impurities of all classes in Israel during the previous year, was to
be observed as a solemn fast, in which “they were to afflict their souls”; it was reckoned a
sabbath, kept as a season of “holy convocation,” or, assembling for religious purposes.
All persons who performed any labor were subject to the penalty of death [Exo_31:14,
Exo_31:15; Exo_35:2]. It took place on the tenth day of the seventh month,
corresponding to our third of October; and this chapter, together with Lev_23:27-32, as
containing special allusion to the observances of the day, was publicly read. The
rehearsal of these passages appointing the solemn ceremonial was very appropriate, and
the details of the successive parts of it (above all the spectacle of the public departure of
the scapegoat under the care of its leader) must have produced salutary impressions
both of sin and of duty that would not be soon effaced.
K&D 29-31, "
General directions for the yearly celebration of the day of atonement. - It was to be
kept on the tenth day of the seventh month, as an “everlasting statute” (see at Exo_
12:14). On that day the Israelites were to “afflict their souls,” i.e., to fast, according to
Lev_23:32, from the evening of the 9th till the evening of the 10th day. Every kind of
work was to be suspended as on the Sabbath (Exo_20:10), by both natives and
foreigners (see Exo_12:49), because this day was a high Sabbath (Exo_31:15). Both
158

159. fasting and sabbatical rest are enjoined again in Lev_23:27. and Num_29:7, on pain of
death. The fasting commanded for this day, the only fasting prescribed in the law, is
most intimately connected with the signification of the feast of atonement. If the general
atonement made on this day was not to pass into a dead formal service, the people must
necessarily enter in spirit into the signification of the act of expiation, prepare their souls
for it with penitential feelings, and manifest this penitential state by abstinence from the
ordinary enjoyments of life. To “afflict (bow, humble) the soul,” by restraining the
earthly appetites, which have their seat in the soul, is the early Mosaic expression for
fasting (‫.)צוּם‬ The latter word came first of all into use in the time of the Judges (Jdg_
20:26; 1Sa_7:6; cf. Psa_35:13 : “I afflicted my soul with fasting”). “By bowing his soul
the Israelite was to place himself in an inward relation to the sacrifice, whose soul was
given for his soul; and by this state of mind, answering to the outward proceedings of the
day, he was to appropriate the fruit of it to himself, namely, the reconciliation of his soul,
which passed through the animal's death” (Baumgarten).
CALVIN, "29.And this shall be a statute for ever. This day of public atonement is
now finally mentioned in express terms, and the affliction of souls, of which fuller
notice is taken in chap. 23, is touched upon, that they may more diligently exercise
themselves in more serious penitential meditations, nor doubt that they are truly
purged before God; and yet in a sacramental manner, viz., that the external
ceremony might be a most unmistakable sign of that atonement, whereby, in the
fullness of time, they were to be reconciled to God. Wherefore Moses states at some
length that this was to be the peculiar office of the priest; and by this eulogy exalts
the grace of the coming Mediator, so that He may direct the minds of believers to
Him alone.
COFFMAN, "Verse 29
"And it shall be a statute forever unto you: in the seventh month, on the tenth day
of the month, ye shall afflict your souls, and shall do no manner of work, the home-
born, or the stranger that sojourneth among you: for on this day shall atonement be
made for you, to cleanse you; from all your sins shall ye be clean before Jehovah. It
is a sabbath of solemn rest unto you, and ye shall afflict your souls; it is a statute
forever. And the priest, who shall be anointed and who shall be consecrated to be
priest in his father's stead, shall make the atonement, and shall put on the linen
garments, even the holy garments: and he shall make atonement for the holy
sanctuary; and he shall make atonement for the tent of meeting and for the altar;
and he shall make atonement for the priests and for all the people of the assembly.
And this shall be an everlasting statute unto you, to make atonement for the
children of Israel because of all their sins once in the year. And he did as Jehovah
commanded Moses."
"Afflict your souls ..." "This means observe a fast, as indicated by Psalms 35:13 and
Isaiah 58:3,5. This was the only fast enjoined in the Mosaic law.[26] The Jews
understood the command to "afflict your souls" as a command to abstain from
159

160. "food, drink, bathing, perfuming, sandals, and intercourse."[27]
What has all this to do with people today? We are expected to respond to the Great
Atonement provided for ourselves in the Great Antitype, of whom these ancient
symbols were eloquent witnesses. As the author of Hebrews put it:
"Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts
sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water ... let us
provoke one another to love and good works, not neglecting the assembling of
ourselves together, as the manner of some is, but exhorting one another, and so
much the more as ye see the day drawing nigh" (Leviticus 10:22-25).
REGARDING AZAZEL
This word is found nowhere else in the Bible, and it certainly does not belong here.
Its injection into the sacred text is contrary to the whole text in which we find it and
is totally unjustified. Enough of this kind of sinful tampering with the Holy
Scriptures will send millions of people back to the King James Bible. No believer
can accept the notion (carried with this word) that God Almighty through Moses
commanded that a demon or the Devil himself split the sin-offering of the children
of Israel, taking an equal share of it! "A demon of this kind could not possibly be
placed in contrast with Jehovah as in Leviticus 16:8."[28] It should also be observed
that in the most significant passage (Leviticus 16:20ff) the word "Azazel" is not
found at all, and it most surely would have appeared in those verses if it had
actually occurred in Leviticus 16:8 and Leviticus 16:9. Those verses (Leviticus
16:8,9) should have been rendered after this manner:
"Aaron shall cast lots over both goats, and the one lot (i.e., for the one goat) for
Jehovah, and one lot for the goat that is to go far away."[29]
The ASV and many subsequent versions and translations of the disputed word here
as a proper name are without any doubt whatever incorrect, false, misleading and
detrimental to understanding the passage. None of the great versions of past
centuries conformed to this ridiculous recent fad. The LXX, the Douay, the KJV,
etc., all reject it. Even the ingenious "interpretations" based upon understanding
Azazel as the proper name of the Devil or of a demon are so forced and imaginative
that practically all of the current crop of interpreters avoid them altogether and go
(by implication) for Devil worship as being a legitimate part of the Scriptures.
As a final note, we have a parallel type of error to the rendition that gave us Reed
Sea instead of Red Sea. (See the note on that subject at the end of Exodus 13 in my
commentary on Exodus.)
COKE, "Leviticus 16:29. This shall be a statute for ever unto you, &c.— For ever,
i.e. while your state and polity shall last: In the seventh month, i.e. of the sacred
year, answering to our September: On the tenth day of the month, or, as it is said in
160

161. ch. Leviticus 23:32 the ninth day at even, because the Jewish day began at the even.
This day was thought to be appointed rather than any other, because it is supposed
that Adam fell upon it. (see Genesis 3:24.) Maimonides thinks that it was the day on
which Moses came down from the mount with the second tables, and proclaimed to
the people the remission of their great sin in worshipping the golden calf. The
phrase, ye shall afflict your souls, doubtless signifies, that they should not only use
all the external marks of humiliation, but also, and especially, truly mortify their
souls by sincere repentance; see Isaiah 58:5-7. It was to be a solemn fast. In
Leviticus 16:31 the phrase it shall be a sabbath of rest, is, it shall be a rest of rests;
i.e. a day of complete rest from all secular and servile employs; and, like the
sabbath, wholly dedicated to religious duties.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 29
(29) And this shall be a statute for ever.—Literally, a statute of eternity, that is, an
everlasting ordinance. That which is contained in Leviticus 16:29-30 is binding upon
the Israelites as long as they exist, and is to be observed by them annually.
In the seventh month, on the tenth day.—This month, which is called Tishri,
corresponds to September, and is the month of great festivals. On the first is the
Feast of Trumpets (see Leviticus 23:24), on the tenth the Day of Atonement, and on
the fourteenth begins the Feast of Tabernacles which lasts eight days.
Ye shall afflict your souls.—From Isaiah 58:3; Isaiah 58:5; Isaiah 58:10 it is evident
that by the phrase “to afflict the soul” is meant fasting. This is expressed by the
fuller form, “to afflict the soul with fasting.” in Psalms 35:13, where the Authorised
Version inconsistently translates it, “humbled my soul.” This is the only public fast
ordained in the Mosaic Law; and the authorities during the second Temple defined
more minutely in what this fasting consists. According to the canon law it consists
not only in abstaining from eating and drinking, but from washing, anointing,
wearing of shoes or sandals, and the marriage-bed, as they were the outward signs
of joy. (Comp. Ecclesiastes 9:10.) If any one presumptuously ate as much as a date
with a kernel, or drank as much as fills one cheek, he violated the Law, and
incurred the penalty of excision. If he did it unintentionally he had to bring a sin
offering. The fast lasted from evening to evening, and is rigorously kept by Jews to
this day. Exception was and still is made in the case of pregnant women, invalids,
and children. This is the fast which the Apostle refers to in Acts 27:9. The marginal
note on this passage, viz., “the fast was on the tenth day of the seventh month”
(Leviticus 23:27; Leviticus 23:29), is not to be found in the first edition of the
Authorised Version. It was introduced by Bishop Lloyd in the Bible published in
London, 1701, fol., who took it from the Geneva Version (Geneva, 1560), and it was
adopted in the Oxford 4to edition, 1703. When Christ admonishes his followers,
“When thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face” (Matthew 6:17), He
refers to the canonical law about fasting here given.
And do no work at all.—Better, ye shall do no manner of work, as the same phrase
161

162. is rendered in the Authorised Version in Leviticus 23:31. It is to be regretted that
this legal phrase, which occurs five times in the Pentateuch, four of which are to be
found in this very book (Leviticus 16:29; Leviticus 23:3; Leviticus 23:28; Leviticus
23:31; Numbers 29:7), should have been translated differently in the Authorised
Version. This variation is all the more glaring in Numbers 29:7, which is the parallel
passage to this. The day was to be a rest from all manual and other secular work
exactly as on the Sabbath, with this exception, that whilst work on the Sabbath was
punished with stoning, labour on the Day of Atonement was punished with excision.
A stranger that sojourneth among you.—That is, one of non-Jewish descent who
had renounced idolatry, and-voluntarily joined the Jewish community. (See Exodus
12:19; Exodus 20:10.)
PETT, "Verse 29
“And it shall be a statute for ever to you. In the seventh month, on the tenth day of
the month, you shall afflict your souls, and shall do no manner of work, the home-
born, or the stranger who sojourns among you, for on this day shall atonement be
made for you, to cleanse you; from all your sins shall you be clean before Yahweh.”
It is now stressed that this is a statute to be carried out into the distant future. On
the tenth day of the seventh month (the month of Tishri/Ethanim in the Autumn
when the early rains were due) the day of Atonement must be observed, and it was
so, with a short break after the destruction of the first temple, until the final
destruction of the temple in 70 AD for well over a thousand years.
On this day they were to ‘afflict themselves’. This probably represented some form
of indicating penitence, although we are not told what it was. It may have been the
loosening of the hair, the ritual tearing of clothes, and the covering of the upper lip
(Leviticus 13:45). (Compare Leviticus 10:6; Leviticus 21:10; Ezekiel 24:17; Ezekiel
24:22; Genesis 37:34; Numbers 14:6; 2 Samuel 1:11; 2 Kings 11:14; 2 Kings 19:1; 2
Kings 22:11; 2 Kings 22:19; Ezra 9:5; Micah 3:7). It would later be related to
fasting, but there is no hint of that here. In Isaiah 58:3-5 it is related to fasting but
rather as something done while fasting, possibly ‘bowing down his head as a rush,
and spreading sackcloth and ashes under him’.
They were also to do no manner of work, and this not only applied to Israel but to
anyone who was living among them. It was to be a strict sabbath, for on that day
atonement was made for them and they were made clean from all their sins as far as
Yahweh was concerned. It was a day when all attention must be on God and all
must have the opportunity to take part without restrictions of work.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:29. The seventh month — Answering part to our
September and part to our October; when they had gathered in all their fruits, and
were most at leisure for God’s service. This time God chose for this and other feasts,
herein graciously condescending to men’s necessities and conveniences. This fast
162

163. began in the evening of the ninth day, and continued till the evening of the tenth.
Your souls — Yourselves, both your bodies, by abstinence from food and other
delights; and your minds, by grief for former sins, which, though bitter, yet is
voluntary in all true penitents, who are therefore here said to afflict themselves, or
to be active in the work.
WHEDON, " GENERAL RULES RESPECTING THE DAY OF ATONEMENT,
Leviticus 16:29-34.
29. Statute for ever — See Leviticus 3:17, note.
Seventh month — Tisri, the first day of which (about the middle of September) the
modern Jews celebrate as the beginning of the civil year. For the importance of the
seventh month, the first day of which was the feast of trumpets, see Leviticus 23:24.
Tenth day — The writer has spent a portion of this day, Sept. 21, 1874, in a
synagogue in Boston, witnessing the penitential worship of the Israelites on the day
of atonement. In chap. xxiii, 32, this fast is commanded to be observed on the ninth.
The discrepancy disappears when we consider that the tenth day began on the
evening of the ninth.
Afflict your souls — Give free scope to conviction of sin. “It is worthy of note that
the Spirit of truth in the unaffected simplicity of a primeval time dwells on the state
of the soul alone, and condescends on no outward manifestations of the inward
feeling. The rabbis and doctors interpret affliction of soul by fasting, because such
was the formal mode in their day.” — Dr. J.G. Murphy. That repentance, and not
fasting, is here commanded is evident, because (1) fasting is neither expressed nor
implied in these words; (2) it should precede the benefits of the atonement in the Old
Testament, as it does in the New Testament; (3) the required fasting of a whole
nation without exception, “from even to even,” tasting neither food nor water,
would not be in harmony with God’s goodness. The command to fast is not found in
the law, and it is a disputed inference in the Gospel. The penitence of the Hebrew
impressively sets forth the truth, that the universal atonement made by Christ is
effectual for the pardon of the penitent sinner only.
A stranger — For his civil and religious rights, see Leviticus 23:22, note. He is freely
admitted into the modern synagogue on the day of atonement.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:29 And [this] shall be a statute for ever unto you: [that] in
the seventh month, on the tenth [day] of the month, ye shall afflict your souls, and
do no work at all, [whether it be] one of your own country, or a stranger that
sojourneth among you:
Ver. 29. Ye shall afflict your souls.] With voluntary sorrows for your sins, - as David
did, [Psalms 35:13] and Daniel, [Daniel 10:3; Daniel 10:12] - and so dispose
yourselves to obtain pardon and reconciliation. The Lord’s supper is with us a day
163

164. of atonement; at which time both the scape goat was let go, and affliction of soul was
called for. This passover must be eaten with sour herbs.
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:29-31
The ceremonies of the Day of Atonement are not appointed for once only, but they
are to be of annual observance. This shall be a statute for ever unto you, as long as
the nation should exist, that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, ye
shall afflict your souls, and do no work at all. The seventh is the sacred month, in
which the first, the tenth, the fifteenth, and following days are appointed as holy
seasons. The Day of Atonement is the single fast of the Jewish Church occurring
once a year only. On it all the members of that Church were to afflict their souls, on
pain of death (Leviticus 23:29). The fast began on the evening of the ninth day, and
ended on the evening of the tenth, when it was succeeded by general feasting.
During the whole of the twenty-four hours no work at all was to be done. In this
respect the Day of Atonement was put on a level with the sabbath, whereas on the
annual festivals only "servile work" was forbidden (see Le Leviticus 23:7, Leviticus
23:21, Leviticus 23:25, Leviticus 23:35). On this day, therefore, as on the weekly
sabbath, it was not permitted to collect manna (Exodus 16:26), or to plough or reap
(Exodus 34:21), or to light a fire (Exodus 35:3), or to gather wood (Numbers
15:32-36), or to carry corn or fruit (Nehemiah 13:15), or to sell food or other goods
(Nehemiah 13:16), or to bear burdens (Jeremiah 17:22, Jeremiah 17:23), or to set
out grain for sale (Amos 8:5). And these regulations applied to strangers that
sojourned among them as well as to themselves. It was a sabbath of rest; literally, a
sabbath of sabbatism. The purpose of the abstinence from food and labour was to
bring the soul of each individual into harmony with the solemn rites of purification
publicly performed not by themselves, but by the high priest.
SIMEON, "DUTIES REQUIRED ON THE GREAT DAY OF ATONEMENT
Leviticus 16:29-30; Leviticus 16:33. And this shall be a statute for ever unto you,
that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, ye shall afflict your souls,
and do no work at all, whether it be one of your own country, or a stranger that
sojourneth among you. For on that day shall the priest make an atonement for you,
to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins before the Lord …And he
shall make an atonement for the holy sanctuary, and he shall make an atonement
for the tabernacle of the congregation, and for the altar; and he shall make an
atonement far the priests, and for all the people of the congregation.
THE wisdom and piety of the Church in early ages appointed, that a considerable
portion of time at this season of the year should be devoted annually to the
particular consideration of Our Saviour’s sufferings; and that the day on which he
is supposed to have died upon the cross, should be always observed as a solemn fast.
In process of time many superstitious usages were introduced; which, however, in
the Reformed Churches, have been very properly discontinued. But it is much to be
regretted, that, whilst we have cast off the yoke of Popish superstition, we have lost,
164

165. in a very great measure, that regard for the solemnities which our Reformers
themselves retained; and which experience has proved to be highly conducive to the
spiritual welfare of mankind. The Nativity of our Lord indeed, because it is a feast,
is observed by almost all persons with a religious reverence; but the day of his
death, being to be kept as a fast, is almost wholly disregarded; insomuch that the
house of God is scarcely at all attended, and the various vocations of men proceed
almost without interruption in their accustomed channel. We are well aware that
the Jewish institutions are not to be revived: but, though the ordinances themselves
have ceased, the moral ends for which they were instituted should be retained; nor
should any means, whereby they may, in perfect consistency with Christian liberty,
be attained, be deemed unworthy of our attention.
The great day of annual expiation was the most solemn appointment in the whole of
the Mosaic economy. Its avowed purpose was to bring men to repentance, and to
faith in the atonement which should in due time be offered. Now these are the sole
ends for which an annual fast is observed on this day: and, if they be attained by us,
we shall have reason to bless God for ever that such an appointment has been
preserved in the Church.
In considering the passage before us there are two things to be noticed;
I. The objects for which atonement was made—
To have a just view of this subject, we must not rest in the general idea of an
atonement for sin, but must enter particularly into the consideration of the specific
objects for which the atonement was made. It was made,
1. For the High-Priest—
[The persons who filled the office of the priesthood were partakers of the same
corrupt nature, as was in those for whom they ministered: and, being themselves
shiners, they needed an atonement for themselves [Note: Hebrews 5:1-3.]: nor could
they hope to interpose with effect between God and the people, unless they
themselves were first brought into a state of reconciliation with God. Hence they
were necessitated to “offer first of all for their own sins.”
And this is a point which reflects peculiar light on the excellency of the dispensation
under which we live. Our High-Priest was under no such necessity: He had no sin of
his own to answer for [Note: 1 Peter 2:22.]: and hence it is that his atonement
becomes effectual for? us [Note: 1 John 3:5; 2 Corinthians 5:21.]: for, if he had
needed any atonement for himself, he never could have procured reconciliation for
us [Note: Hebrews 7:26-28.] — — —]
2. For the people—
[“All the people of the congregation” were considered as sinners; and for all of them
165

166. indiscriminately was the atonement offered. None were supposed to be so holy as not
to need it, nor any so vile as to be excluded from a participation of its benefits.
But here again we are reminded of the superior excellency of the Christian
dispensation. For though, among the Jews, the atonement was offered for all, it did
not suffice for the removal of guilt from all: it took off the dread of punishment for
ceremonial defilements; but left the people at large, and especially all who had been
guilty of presumptuous sin, under the dread of a future reckoning at the tribunal of
God. “It could not make any man perfect as pertaining to the conscience [Note:
Hebrews 9:9-10.].” The very repetition of those sacrifices from year to year shewed,
that some further atonement was necessary [Note: Hebrews 10:1-4.]. But under the
Gospel the reconciliation offered to us is perfect: it extends to all persons and all
sins, in all ages, and quarters, of the world. No guilt is left upon the conscience, no
dread of future retribution remains, where the atonement of Christ has had its full
effect [Note: Hebrews 9:14.]: there is peace with God, even “a peace that passeth all
understanding:” He “perfects, yea, perfects for ever, all them that are sanctified
[Note: Hebrews 10:14; Hebrews 10:17; Hebrews 10:21-22.].”]
3. For “the sanctuary itself and the altar”—
[Even the house of God, and the altar which sanctified every tiling that was put
upon it, were rendered unclean by the ministrations of sinful men. The very touch
or presence of such guilty creatures communicated a defilement, which could not be
purged away but by the blood of atonement. The high-priest, even while making
atonement for the holy place, contracted pollution, from which he must wash
himself, before he could proceed in his priestly work [Note: 4.]. In like manner, the
person who led away the scape-goat into the wilderness, and the person who burnt
the sin-offering without the camp, must wash, both their persons and their clothes,
before they could be re-admitted into the camp [Note: 6–28.]. What an idea does this
give us of the corruption of human nature, when even the most holy actions,
performed according to the express appointment of God, were, by a painful
necessity, the means and occasions of fresh defilement!
From the atonement required for the sanctuary we learn, that heaven itself, so to
speak, is defiled by the admission of sinners into it; and that on that very account it
could not be a meet habitation for the Deity, if it were not purified by the atoning
blood of Christ [Note: Hebrews 9:23.].]
A just view of these things will discover to us the connexion between the atonement
itself, and,
II. The duty especially enjoined at the time of that atonement—
To afflict the soul is our duty at all times—
[As for the penances which men have contrived for the afflicting of the body, they
166

167. are neither acceptable to God, nor beneficial to man: they tend to keep men from
true repentance, rather than to lead them to it. Doubtless such a measure of fasting
and bodily self-denial as shall aid the soul in its operations, is good: but still it is the
soul chiefly that must be afflicted. That is the principal seat of sin, and therefore
should be the principal seat of our sorrows. Indeed, it is the soul alone which
possesses a capacity for real and rational humiliation.
Now as there is “no man who does not in many things, yea, in every thing to a
certain degree offend,” there is no man who does not need to afflict his soul, and to
humble himself before God on account of his defects.
But it may be asked. How is this to be done? How can we reach our soul, so as to
afflict it? I answer, By meditating deeply on our sins. We should call to mind all the
transactions of our former lives, and compare them with the holy commands of God.
We should, as far as possible, make all our sins pass in renew before us: we should
consider their number and variety, their constancy and continuance, their
magnitude and enormity: we should search out all the aggravating circumstances
with which they have been committed, as being done against light and knowledge,
against mercies and judgments, against vows and resolutions, and, above all, against
redeeming love. We should contemplate our desert and danger on account of them,
and our utter loathsomeness in the sight of God. This is the way to bring the soul to
“a broken and contrite” state: and this is the duty of every living man.]
But it was peculiarly proper on the great day of atonement—
[The exercise of godly sorrow would further in a variety of views a just
improvement of all the solemnities of that day.
It would dispose the person to justify God in requiring such services. Those who felt
no sense of sin would be ready to complain of the ordinances as burthensome and
expensive: but those who were truly contrite, would be thankful, that God had
appointed any means of obtaining reconciliation with him— — —
It would prepare the person for a just reception of God’s mercy. An obdurate heart
would reject the promises, just as the trodden path refuses to receive the seed that is
cast upon it. The fallow ground must be broken up before the seed can be sown in it
to good effect — — —
It would lead the person to acknowledge with gratitude the unbounded goodness of
God. A person, unconscious of any malady, would pour contempt on any
prescription that was offered him for the healing of his diseases: but one who felt
himself languishing under a fatal, and, to all appearance, incurable disorder, would
accept with thankfulness any remedy which he knew would restore his health. Thus
it is the penitent sinner, and he only, that will value the offers of mercy through the
blood of atonement — — —
167

168. Lastly, it would stimulate him to greater watchfulness and diligence in future.
Suppose a person pardoned; if he felt not the evil and bitterness of sin, he would be
as remiss and careless as ever: but, if his heart had been altogether broken with a
sense of sin, if he had groaned under it as an intolerable burthen, he would be
doubly careful lest he should subject himself again to the same distress and danger:
and the more assured he was of pardon and acceptance with God, the more desirous
he would be to “render unto God according to the benefits received from
him” — — —]
The reflections to which this subject will naturally give rise, are such as these:
1. How vain is the idea of “establishing a righteousness of our own!”
[If the most holy actions of the most holy men, done expressly according to the
divine appointment, rendered the persons unclean, yea and the very sanctuary of
God and the altar itself unclean, so that the washing of water and the sprinkling of
blood were necessary for their purification, who are we, that we should be able so to
live as to claim a reward on the ground of merit? Let us lay aside this vain conceit,
which, if not corrected, will infallibly issue in our own destruction. We need one to
“bear the iniquity of our holy things [Note: Exodus 28:38.],” no less than the
iniquity of our vilest actions: and, from first to last, we must receive “eternal life as
the free unmerited gift of God through Jesus Christ [Note: Romans 6:23.].”]
2. How transcendent must be the efficacy of our Redeemer’s blood!
[All these sacrifices which were repeated from year to year could never purge the
conscience of one single individual: but the blood of Jesus Christ, once shed on
Calvary, is sufficient to cleanse the whole world. Stupendous thought! Let us
endeavour to realize it, and to get the evidence of it in our own souls — — —]
3. How blessed is the issue of true repentance!
[Men imagine that to afflict the soul is the way to be miserable: but the very reverse
is true: to “sow in tears is the sure way to reap in joy [Note: Psalms 126:5.].” How
beautifully was this represented on the day of atonement! It was on that day (every
fiftieth year) that the Jubilee was to be proclaimed [Note: Leviticus 25:9.]. What a
blessed termination of the day was this! What a balm to every afflicted soul! Think
of the joy which pervaded the whole country, when every man was rendered free,
and all returned to their lost inheritance [Note: Leviticus 25:10.] ! Such shall be the
happy experience of all who afflict their souls for sin and rely upon the atoning
blood of Christ. “They that go on their way weeping, bearing precious seed, shall
doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing their sheaves with them [Note: Psalms
126:6.].”]
168

169. 30 because on this day atonement will be made for
you, to cleanse you. Then, before the Lord, you
will be clean from all your sins.
GILL, "For on that day shall the priest make an atonement for you to
cleanse you,.... By offering the sin offering for them; typical of the sacrifice of Christ,
whose soul was made an offering for sin whereby atonement is made for it, and whose
blood cleanses from all sin. Though the word "priest" is not in the text, it is rightly
supplied, as it is by Aben Ezra, for by no other could, a sacrifice be offered, or atonement
made; and on the day of atonement only by the high priest, who was a type of Christ our
high priest, who has by his sacrifice made reconciliation for sin, and by himself has
purged from it:
that ye may be clean from all your sins before the Lord; which is a general
phrase, as Aben Ezra observes, and may be understood of sins of ignorance and
presumption; as Christ by his blood and sacrifice has cleansed all his people from all
their sins of every sort, so that they stand pure and clean, unblamable and
unreproveable, before the throne of God, and in his sight; see Col_1:22.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 30
(30) For on that day shall the priest make an atonement.—Literally, For on that day
he shall make atonement for you, which may either be the Lord, who is mentioned
in the next clause, or, more probably, the high priest, who is mentioned five verses
before. (See Leviticus 16:25, and especially Leviticus 16:32.)
That ye may be clean . . . —Better, you shall be clean, &c. Because it is here said
“you shall be clean from all your sins before the Lord,” the administrators of the
law in the time of Christ declared that only the sins which a man commits before,
i.e., against the Lord, are atoned for on the Day of Atonement, but the sins which
man commits against his fellow man are not forgiven on this day unless we have
first satisfied our injured neighbour, and have obtained pardon from him. Again, he
who sinneth in the hope that he will obtain absolution on the Day of Atonement, for
him there is no forgiveness on this day.
EXPOSITOR'S DICTIONARY, "The High Priest and the Atonement
169

170. Leviticus 16:30
I. There were many priests, but only one high priest. He only could make
atonement. Under the gospel all believers are priests. But there is but one high
priest, Jesus Christ, called the Great High Priest; He alone can make atonement; He
only can forgive sin.
II. The high priest on the day of atonement was an humbled priest. On this day he
came out clothed in fine linen only. And Jesus, when He made atonement, was an
humbled priest. They stripped from Him even the seamless garment that He wore.
III. The high priest on that day was a spotless priest. Aaron had to be ceremonially
purified. We have a spotless High Priest; He needed no atonement for Himself—He
had no sin to put away.
IV. The high priest on that day was a solitary priest. It is remarkable that no
disciple died with Christ. His disciples forsook Him and fled. We owe all our
salvation to Him, and to Him alone.
V. The high priest on that day was a laborious priest. Jewish authorities assert that
on that day everything was done by Him. Jesus, though He had toiled before, yet
never worked as He did on that wondrous day of atonement.—
C. H. Spurgeon, Outline Sermons, p254.
WHEDON, " 30. To cleanse you — This cleansing was, 1.) a restoration of the
worshipper to membership and communion with the congregation of Israel; and, 2.)
the pretermission or Old Testament forgiveness of sins to the penitent believer in the
divine promises. For we cannot admit that there was in the Jewish sacraments an
operation of grace propria virtute, that is, by themselves alone, irrespective of the
spiritual state of the worshipper. “The perfection of the worshippers is the complete
restoration of their peace with God; and this only can be attained by the complete
removal of the barrier formed by sin, by making them in the fullest sense cleansed.
Had this ever really been once effected for the congregation of Israel by the annual
sacrifices of the day of atonement, no need would have been felt for a repetition of
them. But this was not so.” — Delitzsch on Hebrews 10:2. See Introduction, (7.)
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:30 For on that day shall [the priest] make an atonement for
you, to cleanse you, [that] ye may be clean from all your sins before the LORD.
Ver. 30. That ye may be clean from all your sins.] And so God may turn your fasting
into feasting, as Zechariah 8:19. The joyful jubilee was begun and proclaimed in
this same tenth day. [Leviticus 25:8-9]
170

171. 31 It is a day of sabbath rest, and you must deny
yourselves; it is a lasting ordinance.
GILL, "It shall be a sabbath of rest unto you,.... From all servile work, as before
observed; typical of a cessation from the performance of sinful works, at least from a
sinful course of life, and from a dependence on works of righteousness, when a man is
brought to believe in Christ, and in the atonement which he has made, see Heb_4:3,
and ye shall afflict your souls by a statute for ever: as long as the ceremonial law,
and its statutes and ordinances lasted, which were to be until the time of reformation;
and till that time came, once a year, on the day of atonement, they were to keep a severe
fast, here called an afflicting of their souls; and in this respect this day differed from the
seventh day sabbath, which was rather a festival than a fast, and is what led some of the
Heathen writers (z) into that this take, that the Jews fasted on the sabbath day. The time
of Christ's sufferings, and of his being a sacrifice for the sins of his people, was a time of
great affliction to his disciples; then it was the children of the bridegroom fasted, he
being taken from them; and true humiliation for sin, and repentance of it, are
occasioned and influenced by a view of a suffering Saviour, and atonement by him; and
this may denote also, that such that believe in Christ, and in his atonement, must expect
afflictions and troubles in this world,
ELLICOTT, "(31) It shall be a Sabbath of rest unto you.—Literally, a resting day
of solemn resting, a Sabbath of Sabbaths, i.e., a day of complete and perfect rest.
This phrase, which occurs six times in the Bible, is only applied to weekly Sabbaths
(Exodus 16:23; Exodus 31:15; Exodus 35:2; Leviticus 23:3), the Day of Atonement
(Leviticus 16:31; Leviticus 23:32), and to the Sabbatical year, or the year of Jubilee
(Leviticus 25:4), but not to the other festivals.
PETT, "Verse 31
“It is a sabbath of solemn rest to you, and you shall afflict yourselves. It is a statute
for ever.”
This is repeated for emphasis. It is a sabbath of solemn rest in which they should
afflict themselves in order to demonstrate penitence for sin and uncleanness. And
this was a permanent statute ‘for ever’, that is, into the distant future. In Israel
there was the weekly sabbath which was the last day of a regular seven day period,
what we call ‘a week’, and special sabbaths for special occasions. This was a
171

172. sabbath for a special occasion and could occur any day of the week.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:31 It [shall be] a sabbath of rest unto you, and ye shall afflict
your souls, by a statute for ever.
Ver. 31. It shall be a Sabbath of rest.] An exact and careful rest, such as is described
in Isaiah 58:13, which place of the prophet some understand of this day of
atonement, and yearly fast, spoken of in the beginning of that chapter.
32 The priest who is anointed and ordained to
succeed his father as high priest is to make
atonement. He is to put on the sacred linen
garments
GILL, "And the priest whom he shall anoint,.... Whom God shall anoint, or shall
be anointed, that shall succeed in the high priesthood, as Aaron's sons did, the eldest of
them, and none but such were anointed:
and whom he shall consecrate; or fill his hands, by putting the sacrifices into them;
See Gill on Exo_28:41 andSee Gill on Exo_29:9, Exo_29:24; by which, and by anointing
him, and clothing him with the priestly garments, he was consecrated and installed into
his office, in order
to minister in the priest's office, in his father's stead: a son of an high priest was
always preferred to any other, and to him it of right belonged to succeed his father in his
office: and such an one, thus consecrated,
shall make the atonement; on this day of atonement; not a common priest, but the
high priest only; so Jarchi observes, this expiation of the day of atonement was not right
but by an high priest; for the whole section is said concerning Aaron, and therefore it
must needs be said of an high priest that comes after him, that should be as he was:
and shall put on the linen clothes, even the holy garments: that is, on the day of
atonement; in which clothes all the service peculiar to that day, as it was done by Aaron,
so it was to be done by all his successors.
K&D 32-34, "In the future, the priest who was anointed and set apart for the duty of
the priesthood in his father's stead, i.e., the existing high priest, was to perform the act
172

173. of expiation in the manner prescribed, and that “once a year.” The yearly repetition of
the general atonement showed that the sacrifices of the law were not sufficient to make
the servant of God perfect according to this own conscience. And this imperfection of the
expiation, made with the blood of bullocks and goats, could not fail to awaken a longing
for the perfect sacrifice of the eternal High Priest, who has obtained eternal redemption
by entering once, through His own blood, into the holiest of all (Heb_9:7-12). And just
as this was effected negatively, so by the fact that the high priest entered on this day into
the holiest of all, as the representative of the whole congregation, and there, before the
throne of God, completed its reconciliation with Him, was the necessity exhibited in a
positive manner for the true reconciliation of man, and his introduction into a perfect
and abiding fellowship with Him, and the eventual realization of this by the blood of the
Son of God, our eternal High Priest and Mediator, prophetically foreshadowed. The
closing words in Lev_16:34, “and he (i.e., Aaron, to whom Moses was to communicate
the instructions of God concerning the feast of atonement, Lev_16:2) did as the Lord
commanded Moses,” are anticipatory in their character, like Exo_12:50. For the law in
question could not be carried out till the seventh month of the current year, that is to
say, as we find from a comparison of Num_10:11 with Exo_40:17, not till after the
departure of Israel from Sinai.
ELLICOTT, " (32) And the priest, whom he shall anoint.—Better, And the priest
who shall be anointed. Not only is Aaron to make atonement on this occasion, but, in
future, the priest who shall be consecrated by the proper authorities as his successor
to the pontificate shall perform this act of expiation on the Day of Atonement.
And whom he shall consecrate.—Better, and who shall be consecrated. According to
the canonical interpretation which obtained during the second Temple, this clause
makes the hereditary right to the high priesthood conditional. Unlike property,
which descends to the heirs unconditionally, the son of the high priest can only
succeed his father if he is morally and physically blameless. The decision upon these
points was vested in the community, represented by their elders—the Sanhedrin—
who pronounced whether the heir apparent was qualified or disqualified to step into
the office of pontiff, and who appointed the delegates to anoint and invest the new
high priest with the insignia of his functions.
And shall put on the linen clothes.—Better, and shall put on the linen garments, as it
is rendered in the Authorised Version in Leviticus 16:23. This phrase only occurs
twice, and in this very section. To render it by two different expressions within so
short a space is almost equivalent to depriving it of its identity. Now the priest who
has thus been deemed worthy to succeed to this high office is to put on the holy
white garments on the Day of Atonement.
PETT, "Verse 32
“And the priest, who shall be anointed and who shall be consecrated to be priest in
his father’s stead, shall make the atonement, and shall put on the linen garments,
even the holy garments,”
173

174. The responsibility for the maintenance of this ritual lay with each descendant of the
High Priest who took on his office. The one who was anointed and consecrated in his
father’s place would be the one who had to make atonement and would be permitted
to put on the especially holy garments, the linen garments. But sometimes it would
require a deputy, because of possible illness or infirmity, or because in some way the
High Priest became unclean in such a way that there was not time for him to be
made clean. For the laws of uncleanness applied to him as much as to all. By the
time of Jesus elaborate precautions were taken to prevent this happening.
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:32. The priest whom he shall anoint, and whom he shall
consecrate — This ought to be translated, who shall be anointed, and who shall be
consecrated, as the Vulgate hath it. For an active verb without a person is frequently
in Scripture to be taken passively; the well observing whereof will tend to the
removing of many difficulties. For example; those words of Isaiah, quoted John
12:39-40, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their hearts, import merely,
Their eyes were blinded, and their hearts hardened, as it is expressed Acts 28:27,
and Matthew 13:14-15, compared with Isaiah 6:9. So, he hardened Pharaoh’s heart,
is equivalent to, his heart was hardened, Exodus 7:22. So, he moved David, 2 Samuel
24:1, ought to be translated, David was moved, namely, by his own evil heart, or
Satan’s instigation, 1 Chronicles 21:1.
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:32 And the priest, whom he shall anoint, and whom he shall
consecrate to minister in the priest’s office in his father’s stead, shall make the
atonement, and shall put on the linen clothes, [even] the holy garments:
Ver. 32. Whom he shall consecrate,] i.e., God: or the present high priest, the chief
God on earth. See on Leviticus 6:2.
PULPIT, "Leviticus 16:32, Leviticus 16:33
That there may be no mistake, it is specifically enjoined that not only Aaron, but the
priest, whom he shall anoint, and whom he shall consecrate—meaning, the high
priest that shall be anointed, and shall be consecrated—to minister in the priest's
office in his father's stead—that is, to succeed from time to time to the high
priesthood—shall make the atonement, and shall put on the linen clothes, even the
holy garments. Again it may be noticed that the white robes are termed, not the
penitential, but the holy, garments.
33 and make atonement for the Most Holy Place,
for the tent of meeting and the altar, and for the
174

175. priests and all the members of the community.
BARNES 33-34, "A summary of what was done on the day of atonement.
The day was intended as an occasion for expressing more completely than could be
done in the ordinary sacrifices the spiritual truth of atonement, with a fuller
acknowledgment of the sinfulness and weakness of man and of the corruptible nature of
all earthly things, even of those most solemnly consecrated and devoted to the service of
God. It belonged to its observances especially to set forth, by the entrance of the high
priest into the holy of holies, that atonement could only he effected before the throne of
Yahweh Himself (compare Mat_9:6; Mar_2:7-10; Heb_4:16, etc.); and, by the goat sent
into the wilderness, that the sins atoned for were not only forgiven, but carried wholly
away. See Lev_16:22 note. The rites were a solemn gathering up of all other rites of
atonement, so as to make them point more expressively to the revelation to come of
God’s gracious purpose to man in sending His Son to be delivered for our offences, and
to rise again for our justification; to be our great high priest forever after the order of
Melchisedec, and to enter for us within the veil Rom_4:25; Heb_6:20. The Day of
Atonement expanded the meaning of every sin-offering, in the same way as the services
for Good Friday and Ash Wednesday expand the meaning of our litany days throughout
the year, and Easter Day, that of our Sundays.
GILL, "And he shall make an atonement for the holy sanctuary,.... The holy of
holies, just in the same manner as Aaron had done, Lev_16:16,
and he shall make an atonement for the tabernacle of the congregation; the
court of the tabernacle, and the holy place, and all in them, as Aaron did, in the places
referred
and for the altar; see Lev_16:18,
and he shall make an atonement for the priests; for himself and for his family,
and for all the priests, as Aaron did by his bullock of the sin offering, Lev_16:6,
and for all the people of the congregation of Israel; the whole body of the
Israelites, and with them the Levites, as Aben Ezra observes, for they are not called
priests; indeed every priest was a Levite, but not every Levite a priest; wherefore these
were included not among the priests, but in the congregation of Israel. These several
atonements, according to Ben Gersom, were separate and distinct, and did not hinder
one another, or interfere with one another.
PETT, "Verse 33
175

176. “And he shall make atonement for the holy sanctuary; and he shall make atonement
for the tent of meeting and for the altar; and he shall make atonement for the priests
and for all the people of the assembly.”
The solemn responsibility of ‘The Priest’ is made clear. On this Day he is to make
atonement for the sanctuary, for the tent of meeting and for the altar, and for the
priests and all the people as described above.
WHEDON, "33. The holy sanctuary — The holy of holies, as distinguished from the
tabernacle of the congregation, the apartment of the priests. “The holy things were
rendered unclean, not only by the sins of those who touched them, but by the
uncleanness, that is, the bodily manifestation, of the sin of the nation; so that they
required a yearly expiation and cleansing through the expiatory blood of
sacrifice.” — Keil and Delitzsch. “Thus was the sanctuary cleansed from the
defilement of priests and worshippers, and the communion of the Church with its
Lord re-established. Alike priests and worshippers could now again have sacrificial
access to and fellowship with God. It still remained to cleanse from personal guilt
and sin. This was effected by the so-called ‘scapegoat.’” — Dr. Edersheim. The
human nature of the Word made flesh in which he tabernacled ( εσκηνωσεν) (John
1:14) and wrought out the work of human redemption, being absolutely holy, never
needed purification, since in both flesh and spirit he was “holy, harmless, and
undefiled.”
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:33 And he shall make an atonement for the holy sanctuary,
and he shall make an atonement for the tabernacle of the congregation, and for the
altar, and he shall make an atonement for the priests, and for all the people of the
congregation.
Ver. 33. For the holy sanctuary.] For all the sins of your holy services, it being the
manner that either makes or mars an action.
SIMEON, "DUTIES REQUIRED ON THE GREAT DAY OF ATONEMENT
Leviticus 16:29-30; Leviticus 16:33. And this shall be a statute for ever unto you,
that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, ye shall afflict your souls,
and do no work at all, whether it be one of your own country, or a stranger that
sojourneth among you. For on that day shall the priest make an atonement for you,
to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins before the Lord …And he
shall make an atonement for the holy sanctuary, and he shall make an atonement
for the tabernacle of the congregation, and for the altar; and he shall make an
atonement far the priests, and for all the people of the congregation.
THE wisdom and piety of the Church in early ages appointed, that a considerable
portion of time at this season of the year should be devoted annually to the
particular consideration of Our Saviour’s sufferings; and that the day on which he
is supposed to have died upon the cross, should be always observed as a solemn fast.
176

177. In process of time many superstitious usages were introduced; which, however, in
the Reformed Churches, have been very properly discontinued. But it is much to be
regretted, that, whilst we have cast off the yoke of Popish superstition, we have lost,
in a very great measure, that regard for the solemnities which our Reformers
themselves retained; and which experience has proved to be highly conducive to the
spiritual welfare of mankind. The Nativity of our Lord indeed, because it is a feast,
is observed by almost all persons with a religious reverence; but the day of his
death, being to be kept as a fast, is almost wholly disregarded; insomuch that the
house of God is scarcely at all attended, and the various vocations of men proceed
almost without interruption in their accustomed channel. We are well aware that
the Jewish institutions are not to be revived: but, though the ordinances themselves
have ceased, the moral ends for which they were instituted should be retained; nor
should any means, whereby they may, in perfect consistency with Christian liberty,
be attained, be deemed unworthy of our attention.
The great day of annual expiation was the most solemn appointment in the whole of
the Mosaic economy. Its avowed purpose was to bring men to repentance, and to
faith in the atonement which should in due time be offered. Now these are the sole
ends for which an annual fast is observed on this day: and, if they be attained by us,
we shall have reason to bless God for ever that such an appointment has been
preserved in the Church.
In considering the passage before us there are two things to be noticed;
I. The objects for which atonement was made—
To have a just view of this subject, we must not rest in the general idea of an
atonement for sin, but must enter particularly into the consideration of the specific
objects for which the atonement was made. It was made,
1. For the High-Priest—
[The persons who filled the office of the priesthood were partakers of the same
corrupt nature, as was in those for whom they ministered: and, being themselves
shiners, they needed an atonement for themselves [Note: Hebrews 5:1-3.]: nor could
they hope to interpose with effect between God and the people, unless they
themselves were first brought into a state of reconciliation with God. Hence they
were necessitated to “offer first of all for their own sins.”
And this is a point which reflects peculiar light on the excellency of the dispensation
under which we live. Our High-Priest was under no such necessity: He had no sin of
his own to answer for [Note: 1 Peter 2:22.]: and hence it is that his atonement
becomes effectual for? us [Note: 1 John 3:5; 2 Corinthians 5:21.]: for, if he had
needed any atonement for himself, he never could have procured reconciliation for
us [Note: Hebrews 7:26-28.] — — —]
177

178. 2. For the people—
[“All the people of the congregation” were considered as sinners; and for all of them
indiscriminately was the atonement offered. None were supposed to be so holy as not
to need it, nor any so vile as to be excluded from a participation of its benefits.
But here again we are reminded of the superior excellency of the Christian
dispensation. For though, among the Jews, the atonement was offered for all, it did
not suffice for the removal of guilt from all: it took off the dread of punishment for
ceremonial defilements; but left the people at large, and especially all who had been
guilty of presumptuous sin, under the dread of a future reckoning at the tribunal of
God. “It could not make any man perfect as pertaining to the conscience [Note:
Hebrews 9:9-10.].” The very repetition of those sacrifices from year to year shewed,
that some further atonement was necessary [Note: Hebrews 10:1-4.]. But under the
Gospel the reconciliation offered to us is perfect: it extends to all persons and all
sins, in all ages, and quarters, of the world. No guilt is left upon the conscience, no
dread of future retribution remains, where the atonement of Christ has had its full
effect [Note: Hebrews 9:14.]: there is peace with God, even “a peace that passeth all
understanding:” He “perfects, yea, perfects for ever, all them that are sanctified
[Note: Hebrews 10:14; Hebrews 10:17; Hebrews 10:21-22.].”]
3. For “the sanctuary itself and the altar”—
[Even the house of God, and the altar which sanctified every tiling that was put
upon it, were rendered unclean by the ministrations of sinful men. The very touch
or presence of such guilty creatures communicated a defilement, which could not be
purged away but by the blood of atonement. The high-priest, even while making
atonement for the holy place, contracted pollution, from which he must wash
himself, before he could proceed in his priestly work [Note: 4.]. In like manner, the
person who led away the scape-goat into the wilderness, and the person who burnt
the sin-offering without the camp, must wash, both their persons and their clothes,
before they could be re-admitted into the camp [Note: 6–28.]. What an idea does this
give us of the corruption of human nature, when even the most holy actions,
performed according to the express appointment of God, were, by a painful
necessity, the means and occasions of fresh defilement!
From the atonement required for the sanctuary we learn, that heaven itself, so to
speak, is defiled by the admission of sinners into it; and that on that very account it
could not be a meet habitation for the Deity, if it were not purified by the atoning
blood of Christ [Note: Hebrews 9:23.].]
A just view of these things will discover to us the connexion between the atonement
itself, and,
II. The duty especially enjoined at the time of that atonement—
178

179. To afflict the soul is our duty at all times—
[As for the penances which men have contrived for the afflicting of the body, they
are neither acceptable to God, nor beneficial to man: they tend to keep men from
true repentance, rather than to lead them to it. Doubtless such a measure of fasting
and bodily self-denial as shall aid the soul in its operations, is good: but still it is the
soul chiefly that must be afflicted. That is the principal seat of sin, and therefore
should be the principal seat of our sorrows. Indeed, it is the soul alone which
possesses a capacity for real and rational humiliation.
Now as there is “no man who does not in many things, yea, in every thing to a
certain degree offend,” there is no man who does not need to afflict his soul, and to
humble himself before God on account of his defects.
But it may be asked. How is this to be done? How can we reach our soul, so as to
afflict it? I answer, By meditating deeply on our sins. We should call to mind all the
transactions of our former lives, and compare them with the holy commands of God.
We should, as far as possible, make all our sins pass in renew before us: we should
consider their number and variety, their constancy and continuance, their
magnitude and enormity: we should search out all the aggravating circumstances
with which they have been committed, as being done against light and knowledge,
against mercies and judgments, against vows and resolutions, and, above all, against
redeeming love. We should contemplate our desert and danger on account of them,
and our utter loathsomeness in the sight of God. This is the way to bring the soul to
“a broken and contrite” state: and this is the duty of every living man.]
But it was peculiarly proper on the great day of atonement—
[The exercise of godly sorrow would further in a variety of views a just
improvement of all the solemnities of that day.
It would dispose the person to justify God in requiring such services. Those who felt
no sense of sin would be ready to complain of the ordinances as burthensome and
expensive: but those who were truly contrite, would be thankful, that God had
appointed any means of obtaining reconciliation with him— — —
It would prepare the person for a just reception of God’s mercy. An obdurate heart
would reject the promises, just as the trodden path refuses to receive the seed that is
cast upon it. The fallow ground must be broken up before the seed can be sown in it
to good effect — — —
It would lead the person to acknowledge with gratitude the unbounded goodness of
God. A person, unconscious of any malady, would pour contempt on any
prescription that was offered him for the healing of his diseases: but one who felt
himself languishing under a fatal, and, to all appearance, incurable disorder, would
accept with thankfulness any remedy which he knew would restore his health. Thus
179

180. it is the penitent sinner, and he only, that will value the offers of mercy through the
blood of atonement — — —
Lastly, it would stimulate him to greater watchfulness and diligence in future.
Suppose a person pardoned; if he felt not the evil and bitterness of sin, he would be
as remiss and careless as ever: but, if his heart had been altogether broken with a
sense of sin, if he had groaned under it as an intolerable burthen, he would be
doubly careful lest he should subject himself again to the same distress and danger:
and the more assured he was of pardon and acceptance with God, the more desirous
he would be to “render unto God according to the benefits received from
him” — — —]
The reflections to which this subject will naturally give rise, are such as these:
1. How vain is the idea of “establishing a righteousness of our own!”
[If the most holy actions of the most holy men, done expressly according to the
divine appointment, rendered the persons unclean, yea and the very sanctuary of
God and the altar itself unclean, so that the washing of water and the sprinkling of
blood were necessary for their purification, who are we, that we should be able so to
live as to claim a reward on the ground of merit? Let us lay aside this vain conceit,
which, if not corrected, will infallibly issue in our own destruction. We need one to
“bear the iniquity of our holy things [Note: Exodus 28:38.],” no less than the
iniquity of our vilest actions: and, from first to last, we must receive “eternal life as
the free unmerited gift of God through Jesus Christ [Note: Romans 6:23.].”]
2. How transcendent must be the efficacy of our Redeemer’s blood!
[All these sacrifices which were repeated from year to year could never purge the
conscience of one single individual: but the blood of Jesus Christ, once shed on
Calvary, is sufficient to cleanse the whole world. Stupendous thought! Let us
endeavour to realize it, and to get the evidence of it in our own souls — — —]
3. How blessed is the issue of true repentance!
[Men imagine that to afflict the soul is the way to be miserable: but the very reverse
is true: to “sow in tears is the sure way to reap in joy [Note: Psalms 126:5.].” How
beautifully was this represented on the day of atonement! It was on that day (every
fiftieth year) that the Jubilee was to be proclaimed [Note: Leviticus 25:9.]. What a
blessed termination of the day was this! What a balm to every afflicted soul! Think
of the joy which pervaded the whole country, when every man was rendered free,
and all returned to their lost inheritance [Note: Leviticus 25:10.] ! Such shall be the
happy experience of all who afflict their souls for sin and rely upon the atoning
blood of Christ. “They that go on their way weeping, bearing precious seed, shall
doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing their sheaves with them [Note: Psalms
126:6.].”]
180

181. 34 “This is to be a lasting ordinance for you:
Atonement is to be made once a year for all the
sins of the Israelites.”
And it was done, as the Lord commanded Moses.
GILL, "And this shall be an everlasting statute unto you,.... Which is the third
time of its being observed, see Lev_16:29, to show that this was a law of considerable
moment, and to be taken notice of, and strictly and closely kept by the priests, to whom
these words are directed, and on whom the chief service of the day lay:
to make atonement for the children of Israel for all their sins once a year;
namely, on the tenth day of the seventh month, or Tisri, as before directed:
and he did as the Lord commanded Moses; that is, Aaron did, as the Targum of
Jonathan, Aben Ezra, and Ben Gersom supply it; when the day of atonement came, as
Jarchi expresses it, he did according to this order, to fulfil the decree of the king, even
the King of kings; whose will it was that such a day should be yearly observed, and such
and such rules performed in it; so very significant of Christ, and of the atonement to be
made by him, and which has been made.
COKE, "Verse 34
Leviticus 16:34. To make an atonement for the children of Israel for all their sins—
The rabbis observe, that all these rites of expiation, however solemnly performed,
were nothing in the sight of God without repentance and sincere resolutions of new
obedience: so neither, under the Christian dispensation, can any man be entitled to
the merits of Christ's atonement, without genuine repentance; a deficiency in which
renders the most pompous forms of external worship mere solemn mockery. "The
ceremonies of this sacred day," says Henry, "afford us on one side a type of what
Christ our great High-Priest hath done for our salvation, delivering us from our sins
by the free oblation of himself; after which, entering into the holy places, not made
with hands, he hath opened an access for us by the efficacy of his death and the
merits of his intercession. On the other hand, we see what we ought to do, in order
to partake of the sacrifice and intercession of the Son of God. By faith we should lay
our hands upon that precious Victim, regarding it as the only price of our
181

182. redemption, and as the only means of salvation. By repentance we should afflict our
souls, renounce sin, die to it, and live again unto righteousness."
The very ingenious editors of the Prussian Testament, Messrs. De Beausobre and
L'Enfant, observe, that "this fast, in general, was the most lively representation of
the atonement which was made for the sins of mankind by the blood of JESUS
CHRIST." It is observable, that Philo-Judaeus had some notion of this truth; for, in
his Treatise de Somn. p. 447 he says, that the Word of God, whereby he means the
Son, is the Head and Glory of the propitiation, i.e. of what renders men acceptable
to God. These passages of Scripture, that Jesus Christ gave his life a ransom for
many, Matthew 20:28 that he was made the propitiation for our sins, 1 John 4:10
that he was the propitiation, not only for our sins, but also for those of the whole
world, 1 John 2:2 and such like expressions, which occur almost in every page of the
Gospel, can mean nothing more, than that Jesus Christ has, by the sacrifice of
himself, performed that, which was only prefigured by the sacrifices under the law,
and particularly by the general and solemn expiation we are now speaking of. The
same Jewish author, quoted just before, had also some notion of this matter. It will
be proper to set down his very words; not as if we thought they were any
confirmation of the Christian religion, but only to shew that these were truths which
the wisest part of the nation acknowledged, and had found out by close and serious
meditation, accompanied with Divine illumination. He says then, that whereas the
priests of other nations offered sacrifices for their own countrymen only, the high-
priest of the Jews offered for all mankind, and for the whole creation. (See Phil. de
Monar. p. 637.) And not only these sacrifices, which were offered on the day of
expiation, were a more exact representation of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ than any
other; but also the person, by whom the atonement was made, was in every respect
qualified to represent the High-Priest of the Christian church: and that, 1. Upon the
account of his dignity, which, according to the Jews, was at its utmost height when
he entered into the holy of holies; for which reason he was called great among his
brethren, ch. Leviticus 21:10. This dignity was so very considerable, that Philo does
not scruple to say, agreeable to his lofty and rhetorical way of speaking, that the
high-priest was to be something more than human; that he more nearly resembled
God than all the rest; and that he partook both of the divine and human nature.
(See de Monar. p. 63 and de Somn. p. 872.) It seems to have been with a design of
expressing both the holiness and dignity of the high-priest, that the law had enjoined
none should remain in the tabernacle while the high-priest went into the holy of
holies; see Leviticus 16:17. [Further, the high-priest of the Jews, upon the day of
atonement, put not on at the first his best suit of apparel, but was content with the
holy linen garments which he wore in common with other priests; hereby signifying,
that when our blessed Lord should come into the world, to do the will of God, he
should not make a splendid figure, nor array himself with all that glory of which he
is truly possessed.] 2. The high-priest represented our Saviour by his holiness: To
denote which, a greater quantity of oil was used in the anointing of the high-priest,
than in that of his brethren; whence he was called the priest anointed, ch. Leviticus
4:3; Leviticus 4:5. Nothing can better represent the great holiness of Jesus Christ,
than this great plenty of oil used in the consecration of Aaron. 3. The high-priest
182

183. represented Jesus Christ by his being, on the day of atonement, a mediator between
God and the people. For though Moses be called a mediator in the New Testament,
yet it is certain, that the high-priest was invested with this office on the day of
expiation. Moses must indeed be acknowledged as a mediator, God having by his
means made a covenant with the children of Israel. But, as they were very apt to
transgress the law, it was necessary there should be a mediator, who, by his
sacrifices and intercession, might reconcile them to God. Now this was the high-
priest's function; so that Moses and Aaron were exact types of the two-fold
mediation of Jesus Christ. By him was the new covenant made, and by his own
blood has he for ever reconciled God to mankind. 4. The entrance of Jesus Christ
into heaven once for all, there to present his own blood to God, as an atonement for
our sins, was very clearly typified by the high-priest's going once a year into the
holy of holies with the blood of victims; see Hebrews 12:24. As for the two goats, we
learn from the epistle of St. Barnabas, (which must have been written not long after
the destruction of Jerusalem) that they were even then looked upon as typical.
Further reflections, 1st, On the fast of anniversary atonement in general: and, 2nd,
on the ordinance of the scape-goat in particular.
I. On the fast of anniversary atonement in general.
Whatever our great High-Priest has done on earth beneath, or in heaven above, for
the salvation of his people, was prefigured in this venerable solemnity. This the
inspired writer to the Hebrews having at great length illustrated to our hand, it will
not be necessary to enlarge upon. Let it suffice briefly to hint at the typical sense of
some of the principal sacerdotal actions reserved for this memorable day.
The happy effects of the holy rites practised on this great anniversary, are said to be
a cleansing the people from all their sins, Leviticus 16:30. Now, it is evident that
these carnal ordinances have many marks of weakness and imperfection. If we
speak of real atonement, it was utterly impossible that the blood of these bullocks
and goats could take away sin as pertaining to the conscience. They were but brute
creatures, of an inferior nature to the priest that offered them, and to the people for
whom they were offered. They were offered by a sinful man, who needed an
atonement for himself. They were offered year by year continually, and in them a
remembrance was again made of sin every year. Now, if they could have made the
comers to them perfect, would they not have ceased to be offered? Most certainly
they would: because that the worshippers once purged, should have had no more
conscience of sin. In all these things the priest of our profession has the pre-
eminence. He needed not, like Aaron and his successors, to offer for himself, being
harmless and undefiled. He needed not to shed the blood of others; for he was able
to offer up himself. He needed not repeat his sacrifice oftener than once; for by one
offering he hath for ever perfected all them that are sanctified. These necessary
allowances being made, of the vast disparity between the type and Jesus Christ, we
shall touch upon some of the grand evangelical mysteries which were enigmatically
preached to the Jews in the transactions of this day.
183

184. That in future time a true and proper atonement should be made for the sins of
Israel; or, to use the style of the prophet Zechariah, that "God would remove the
iniquity of his land in one day," Zechariah 3:9 this seems to have been the leading
doctrine held forth in all the sacrifices, but especially in those which were offered on
this occasion.—Yet a little while, and God will exhibit a propitiation in the promised
Messiah, who shall finish transgression, and make an end of sin, and perfectly do
that will of God, which cannot be fulfilled by any legal sacrifices or burnt-offerings.
And how shall this great event be brought to pass? How shall the Messias redeem
Israel from all his iniquities? What shall he do? What shall be done unto him? How
shall he begin; and in what manner shall he finish the arduous work? These
questions may all be answered by these anniversary rites.
It was signified, that the great Maker of atonement should assume the nature of the
persons for whom it should be made: for their high-priest was one of their brethren,
and taken from among men.—That he should be constituted a public person: for the
high-priest officiated on this occasion as the representative of the people.—That in
this character he should suffer the punishment of death, and his life be violently
taken away: for the sin and burnt-offerings were slain.—That the blood of Jesus
should be shed in a public manner without the gate: for the bodies of the sacrificed
beasts were burned without the camp.—That he should, when the work of purging
our sins was finished, disappear on earth, and enter within the vail of these visible
heavens, into the happy place where God resides among the blessed angels: for
when the high-priest had shed the blood of the bullock and the goat, he went out of
the sight of the Israelites, entering within the vail into that venerable apartment,
where were the symbols of the Divine Presence, and where JEHOVAH sat
enthroned between the cherubims.—That though the heavens should contain him,
and the world see him no more, he should still be carrying on his priestly work in
the presence of God: for when the Jewish priest entered within the vail, he
perfumed the mercy-seat with incense, and sprinkled it with blood. Indeed, unless
the high-priest had gone into the holiest of all with his blood and incense, he had not
discharged the most glorious part of his work. If he had only offered the victims,
and gone no further than the middle court, the inferior priests had been upon a level
with him; for these things they did as well as he: so if Jesus Christ had continued
upon earth, where he offered up himself; if he had not gone to the Father, and
retired from the view of men, he could not have been a priest in the most eminent
sense of the word: the most glorious parts of his function were still to be discharged,
and the resemblance between him and the Jewish high-priest would have been very
imperfect. But rejoice, O ye that believe on his name, who make his atonement the
grand basis of your comfort; for we have a great High-Priest, who was once upon
earth, but is now passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God. There he appears as
a Lamb that was slain, and stands with his golden censer, to offer up the incense of
his intercession with the prayers of all saints. A time will come, when the interposing
vail shall be drawn aside, and the great High-Priest return with sound of trumpet,
to bless his expecting people, and absolve them from all their iniquities before an
assembled world: for "to them that look for him, he shall appear a second time,
184

185. without sin, unto salvation." Hebrews 9:28.
II. On the ordinance of the scape-goat.
The goat is none of those creatures which are supposed to have the most amiable
properties. It may therefore seem singular, that the Lamb of God should be
prefigured by such beasts, as are, for their uncleanly and unruly temper, emblems
of the wicked, who in the last day shall be separated from the godly by the Judge of
all the earth. But perhaps even this circumstance in the type might signify, that
Christ was to appear in the likeness of sinful flesh. The goat, though commonly held
an unclean creature, was, notwithstanding, of the number of clean beasts in the law
of Moses: and Jesus Christ, though reputed among men a sinner, was most pure and
righteous in the eye of God.
But wherefore two goats? Or if two, why not both used in the same manner? Why
was one of them put to death, and the other saved alive? Doubtless they are both to
be viewed as types of the great Propitiation. The first may signify that complete
satisfaction which Christ made to Divine justice by the offering up of himself; and
the second, the happy consequence of this propitiatory sacrifice, in finishing
transgression, making an end of sin, and carrying it, as it were, into the land of
forgetfulness; so that, to use the elegant words of Jeremiah, "the iniquity of Israel
shall be sought for, and there shall be none; and the sins of Judah, and they shall
not be found." Jeremiah 50:20. Nor ought it to seem strange, that such a momentous
truth should be inculcated so many various ways on the same occasion: for it is a
singular effect of the goodness of God, to exhibit such interesting truths in different
views, that we may have strong consolation. Besides that all similitudes and types
fall infinitely short of the great mysteries they point at, therefore they are
multiplied, that they may mutually supply the deficiences of each other: for here the
saying is made good, "Two are better than one; for if they fall, the one will lift up
his fellow."
That the first goat was an emblem of Christ sacrificed for us, as much as any other
sacrifices, is clearly evident: but we are now to attend to the mystery of the scape-
goat, and its likeness to Jesus Christ.
It was, like the other, to be taken from the congregation of Israel, and doubtless
purchased with the public money. So Christ was taken from among his brethren,
and bought, in some sense, for thirty pieces of silver out of the public treasury, that
he might be numbered with transgressors, and bear the sins of many.
It was, like the other, presented at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation
before the Lord and all the people. So Christ presented himself to do his heavenly
Father's will before God and the people, when, at the passover-solemnity, he went
up to Jerusalem, not ignorant of what was to be done to him by Jews and Gentiles.
The sacred animal being thus presented, the high-priest was to lay both his hands
185

186. upon its head, devoting it by this action to the service of God, and translating the
sins of Israel upon it in a typical manner. Perhaps it might signify, that the hand of
Divine Justice was to lie heavy on the surety of sinners; and it is expressly affirmed
by the prophet, "The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." Isaiah 53:6.
That this was the meaning of the rite, appears more evidently from the following
one. For in this posture did the high-priest confess all the sins of the people from
whom the goat was taken. Why should their sins be confessed in this manner, if it
was not to signify, that they were in some sort laid upon the head of the innocent
victim? It was thus the great Doer of God's will, who knew no sin, was made sin, for
us. The goat could not be guilty of these sins, for it was a brute beast: nor could its
antitype, who was spotless and sinless, be a transgressor of the law. Yet both the one
and the other did bear the sins of many, to which it was impossible in the nature of
things that they could be accessary in the smallest degree. It was not thy sin, O
spotless Victim, but the sin of the world, which consigned thee over to the bloody
and shameful cross! Ours were the sins which took hold upon thee, and justified thy
death. "Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows, and the
chastisement of our peace was upon him." Isaiah 53:4-5. How else could his
heavenly Father, for whom it is no more good to punish the just than to clear the
guilty, have been pleased to bruise him?
The devoted creature, thus laden with sin, is, by the hand of a proper person,
conducted into the wilderness. Why should not this wilderness be viewed as an
emblem of those afflictions to which the surety was exposed by the sins he was
charged with? Or shall we say, it might be a faint intimation, that the blessing of the
atonement should be extended to the world of Gentile sinners, which, in the style of
the prophet, is called the wilderness of the people? Or, rather, the meaning may be,
that, as the mystic goat was never more looked after, (for probably it would soon
perish, if not by hunger, at least by wild beasts,) so Jesus Christ, by his atoning
blood, would take away the sin of the world, and remove away all the iniquities of
his faithful people, as far as the east is distant from the west. O condemning law,
thou hast nothing to lay to their charge, for Christ is dead! Yea, rather he is risen
again! therefore it is God that justifieth!
What thanks shall be rendered to that gracious Redeemer, who was manifested to
restore to God that glory which he took not away, and to take away that sin of man
which he did not introduce? But there are, alas! too many to whom this all-
important truth is of small account, (for some deride, and more despise it,) yet to the
weary soul, to the conscience burdened with guilt, it is grateful and delicious, as the
full flowing stream to the hunted hart. The happy soul, to which the doctrine of the
atonement is experimentally known, hears, upon the matter, the voice of the great
JEHOVAH speaking to her in such ravishing accents as these: "I have made thine
iniquity to pass from thee;" or in the words of Nathan to the penitent king David,
"the Lord hath taken away thy sin; thou shalt not die." Who would not be
constrained by this love, to put away the evil of their doings from before his eyes
who has put away the guilt of them from before his face?
186

187. Draw near all ye whose consciences are burdened with the intolerable pressure of a
thousand aggravated iniquities, who are ready to cry, "Mine iniquities are gone
over my head, they are a burden too heavy for me." Psalms 38:4. While some, with
Cain, go from the presence of the Lord, and drown their dismal thoughts in the
delights of sense, or else in the whirl of business—while others have no ground of
comfort but the general and unatoned mercy of God—while a third sort derive
comfort to their troubled hearts from their own imperfect righteousness, their tears
of repentance, their sorrow for what is past, and their resolutions to do better for
the future; confers your iniquities over the head of the New-Testament scape-goat:
for "he, who [thus] confesseth and forsaketh them, shall find mercy." Proverbs
28:13. Thus runs the gracious promise of the Holy One of Israel, "By his knowledge
shall my righteous servant justify many: for he shall bear their iniquities." Isaiah
53:11. But he, who despises this way of peace, shall bear his own burden, whosoever
he be.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 34
(34) And this shall be an everlasting statute.—Better, And this shall be a statute for
ever, as the Authorised Version has it in Leviticus 16:29. Here, again, we have an
instance of how the same phrase which occurs three times within four verses (see
Leviticus 16:29; Leviticus 16:31; Leviticus 16:34) is rendered in the Authorised
Version by two different phrases, thus giving the idea to the English reader that
there is a difference in the original. The thrice-repeated phrase emphasises the
abiding nature of this law, and indicates the solemnity of the day.
And he did as the Lord commanded Moses—That is, Aaron performed the service
for the first time, according to the ordinances which the Lord communicated to
Moses. A similar remark occurs at the first observance of the Passover. (See Exodus
12:50.) The solemn admonition, therefore, addressed to the priesthood at the
beginning of this chapter (see Leviticus 16:1-2), not to presume on their office, but to
submit to the Divine regulations, was duly observed by the first high priest. It may,
however, also be designed to indicate that Aaron did not assume the dignity of the
pontificate to exalt himself, but in obedience to the command God gave to Moses.
PETT, "Verse 34
“And this shall be an everlasting statute to you, to make atonement for the children
of Israel because of all their sins once in the year.” And he did as Yahweh
commanded Moses.
And it is repeated that this statute should be applied into the distant future so as to
make atonement for the children of Israel because of their sins once a year. In the
final analysis it was ‘the children of Israel’ whom God wanted to bless and save.
And the writer finishes the record with a confirmation of Aaron’s obedience to what
God had said. presumably this is speaking of his first observance of the Day of
187

188. Atonement, and the point is that he carried it out to the letter.
As we cease our study into the Day of Atonement we, as Christians, have much to
glory in. This Day was one that had to be repeated every year, it was carried
through by a sinful High Priest who had first to offer purification for sin offerings
for himself, on the basis of what was involved its effect could only be partial (no he-
goat could bear all the sins of Israel, nor were they totally annihilated), it only
allowed the High Priest into Yahweh’s presence once a year, and the remainder not
at all.
But we as Christians know that Christ has made for us a total and complete
sacrifice offered once-for-all (Hebrews 10:12), has no need to offer a purification for
sin offering for Himself (Hebrews 7:26-27), made a sacrifice that was truly sufficient
for all sin for all time (Hebrews 9:14; Hebrews 10:10; Hebrews 10:12; Hebrews
10:14), has borne all our sin for us and has removed it for ever, and has made a way
for each individual Christ to enter into the Holiest of all, into the very presence of
God, by His blood and through His death and resurrection (Hebrews 10:19-21) so
that they may be presented perfect before Him without spot, or wrinkle, or any such
thing, but holy and without blemish (Ephesians 5:27).
BENSON, "Leviticus 16:34. This shall be an everlasting statute — By which were
typified the two great gospel privileges; remission of sins and access to God, both
which we owe to the mediation of the Lord Jesus. He shall make an atonement —
for all their sins — Meaning all such sins as could be expiated by the law, which
were, τα αγνοηματα, the errors, or sins of ignorance of the people, as the apostle
expresses it Hebrews 9:6, where he speaks of the atonement made on this day. “To
this sort of offences alone,” as Dr. Doddridge justly observes on the verse just
referred to, “and not to those presumptuously committed, the efficacy of the
atonement extended.” And even to justification from these, as the Hebrew doctors
justly observe, all these rites of expiation, however solemnly performed, availed
nothing in the sight of God, without repentance, and sincere resolutions of new
obedience. Now, the two great gospel duties of repentance and faith are hereby
typified; by which we obtain an interest in the atonement made by the death of
Christ, and come to be entitled to the benefit of it. By repentance we must afflict our
souls — inwardly sorrowing for our sins, and living a life of self-denial and
mortification. And we must make a penitent confession of sin, and that with an eye
to Christ whom we have pierced. By faith we must put our hands on the head of the
offering, relying on Christ as the Lord our righteousness; pleading his satisfaction,
as that which was alone able to atone for our sins, and procure us a pardon, and
with a hand of faith on his sacrifice, must assure ourselves that, if we confess and
forsake our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and cleanse us from
all unrighteousness. We may observe further here, that in the year of jubilee, the
trumpet which proclaimed liberty was ordered to be sounded in the close of the day
of atonement, Leviticus 25:9. For the remission of the debt we owe to God, our
release from the bondage of sin, and our return to our inheritance above, are all
owing to the mediation and intercession of Jesus Christ. By the atonement we obtain
188

189. rest for our souls, and all the glorious liberties of the children of God.
WHEDON, " 34. For all their sins — Though this day is appointed by God as the
day for the forgiveness of sins, no such end can be reached except by true
repentance and the firm determination not to sin any more. As is stated in Tr.
Yoma, 85 b: “He who yieldeth to sin in the supposition that the day of atonement
will bring him forgiveness, will find no forgiveness on this day. And only the sins
committed by man against God can be atoned for on this day; as to the sins,
however, between man and man, this day is powerless to remove them until the
offender has appeased the offended.” Since there were many sins and “errors”
(Greek, ignorances, Hebrews 9:7) for which there had been no specific expiation in
the Levitical code, and many which had been neglected, there was need of one
general expiation once each year. See Leviticus 16:9, note. “If the law were not
spiritual, atonement would not be so absolutely necessary. That any one could keep
the law, and thereby merit the favour of God, never entered the thought of the
lawgiver. Its immediate purpose was only to excite a sense of the need of
redemption. In this view, the law was only παιδαγωγος εις χριστον,” (a child-leader
unto Christ.) — Hengstenberg. For a reply to Baehr’s denial of the substitutional
nature of the Mosaic sacrifices, see Numbers 15, concluding note. “To a God of
infinite benevolence, justice, and holiness, nothing can compensate for sin save the
removal of sinfulness from the heart of the sinner; nothing make room for
forgiveness save the establishment of a principle of daily life actually operating and
assuring that removal. Wherefore the willing self-sacrifice of the innocent for the
guilty is admissible in God’s plan of salvation, not as an end satisfactory in itself,
but as a means for effecting that real, practical removal of sin by the destruction of
sinfulness, which will justify a just and holy God for pardoning and forgetting the
sins of the past. To this principle nothing else in the whole Mosaic ritual so plainly
points as does the feast of atonement. In the death of its victims it repeated the daily
lesson of bloody sacrifices; while in its liberated offering it set forth the crowning
truth, that even self-sacrifice can expiate sins committed only in so far as it
removes — ’sends away for Azazel’ — the disposition to commit sins.” — Geo. W.
Cable.
And he — that is, Aaron, to whom Moses was directed to communicate this
command — did as the Lord commanded. This bit of history must have been added
at least seven months after the dedication of the tabernacle, when Nadab and Abihu
were slain and the precepts of this chapter were given. The first day of atonement
was after the rebellion at Kadesh-Barnea. Compare Leviticus 9:23; Leviticus 10:1,
with Exodus 40:17, and Introduction to Numbers, (4.)
TRAPP, "Leviticus 16:34 And this shall be an everlasting statute unto you, to make
an atonement for the children of Israel for all their sins once a year. And he did as
the LORD commanded Moses.
Ver. 34. For all their sins once a year.] For whereas in their private sacrifices they
durst not confess their capital sins for fear of death, due to them by the law, God
189

190. graciously provided and instituted this yearly sacrifice of atonement for the sins of
the whole people, without particular acknowledgment of any. There are of good
note who think, (a) that this anniversary fast, called "the fast" by a specialty, [Acts
27:9] was instituted in reference unto, and solemn remembrance of, the fall of
Adam; which happened, say they, on the tenth day of the world, answering to the
first of November. But how strangely are the Jews at this day besotted, if that be
true of them that some (b) report, viz., that at this their feast of reconciliation, they
use to bribe Satan, that he may not accuse them for their sins; and that this is one
thing for which they do yearly afflict their souls, namely, the translation of the Bible
out of Hebrew into Greek, by the Septuagint!
PULPIT, "This shall be an everlasting statute unto you. It lasted as long as the
earthly Jerusalem lasted, and until the heavenly Jerusalem was instituted, when it
had a spiritual fulfillment once for all. "Of old there was an high priest that
cleansed the people with the blood of bulls and goats, but now that the true High
Priest is come, the former priesthood is no more. It is a providential dispensation of
God that the city and temple of Jerusalem have been destroyed; for if they were still
standing, some who are weak in faith might be dazzled by the outward splendor of
the literal types, and not drawn by faith to the spiritual antitypes. If there are any,
therefore, who, in considering the Levitical ritual of the great Day of Atonement,
and in looking at the two he-goats—the one sacrificed, the other let go, charged with
sins, into the wilderness—do not recognize the one Christ who died for our sins and
took away our sins, and do not see there the 'everlasting statute' of which God here
speaks by Moses, let him go up thrice a year to Jerusalem, and there search for the
altar which has crumbled in the dust, and offer up his victims there without a priest.
But no; thanks be to God, the earthly priesthood and temple are abolished, that we
may raise our heart to the heavenly, and look up with faith and love and joy to him
who offered himself once for all, and who ever liveth to make intercession for us"
(Origen, 'Hom.' 10; as quoted by Wordsworth). And he did as the Lord commanded
Moses; that is. Moses announced to Aaron the Law which was to be carried out
about five months later.
190