Difference between revisions of "Red Heifer"

From BiblePortal Wikipedia
Line 1: Line 1:
== Hawker's Poor Man's Concordance And Dictionary <ref name="term_48639" /> ==
== Fausset's Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_35645" /> ==
<p> Among all the laws of the [[Levitical]] priesthood concerning sacrifices, there is hardly one more striking in all the particulars of it: as referring to the Lord Jesus Christ; and yet there is not one so generally little understood, or attended to. [[I]] beg the reader's attention to it as a subject highly interesting. He will find the account of it set forth at large, &nbsp;Numbers 19:1-10. Moses was commanded to speak unto the children of [[Israel]] to bring a red heifer without spot, wherein was no blemish, and upon which never came yoke. Eleazer the priest was to bring her forth without the camp, and one was to slay her before his face. Eleazer was then to take of her blood with his finger, and sprinkle of her blood directly before the tabernacle of the congregation seven times. One was then to burn the heifer in his sight; her skin, her flesh, and her blood, with her dung, all was to be burnt. Then the priest was to take cedar wood, and hyssop, and scarlet, and cast it into the midst of the burning of the heifer. Then the priest was to wash his clothes, and to bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he was to come into the camp, and be unclean until the even. And he that burned the heifer was to wash his clothes inwater, and bathe his flesh in water, and be unclean until the even. And a man that was clean was to gather the ashes of the heifer and lay them up without the camp in a clean place, to be kept for the congregation of the children of Israel for a water of separation: it is a purification for sin. And this was to be both to the children of Israel, and the stranger that sojourned among them, for a statute for ever. </p> <p> Such are the interesting particulars in the Lord's appointment of the sacrifice of the red heifer. [[I]] would now beg to call the reader's attention to the service itself, in order to remark the prominent features of the ordinance, as typical of the person and offering of the Lord Jesus Christ, </p> <p> And first, the heifer was to be red. [[A]] most unlikely thing to obtain, as if to prefigure the singularity of the person of Jesus; for none but the Lord Christ could be suited for our salvation: and the personal fitness of Jesus, in the singularity of his person and character, is that which endears him so highly to his people. Perhaps the reader may not know, or if he doth, he may not immediately re collect, that Adam was called Adam, or Adamah, on account of the red earth or dust from whence he was taken. [[Pure]] virgin earth is naturally red. Now the Lord Jesus is also called the last Adam. (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 15:45) And it is said of him, with peculiar reference to his human nature, that "forasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same." (&nbsp;Hebrews 2:14) And hence the church sings of him in the joy of her heart, "My beloved (said she) is white and ruddy, the chiefest among, ten thousand." (&nbsp;Song of Song of [[Solomon]] 5:10) </p> <p> Secondly, this red heifer was to be without spot, and wherein there was no blemish. What could more strikingly depicture the features of him "who with out spot offered himself to God!" He was indeed, as the [[Holy]] Ghost hath drawn him, "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens." (&nbsp;Hebrews 7:26) We are told that the [[Jews]] were so very tenacious that this heifer should be exactly corresponding to the %ordinance in those particulars, that if the animal had but a spot of different colour from the red, yea, but in a single hair, it was rejected. Surely nothing could be more in reference to the "lamb of God who was without blemish and without spot." (&nbsp;1 Peter 1:19) </p> <p> Thirdly, that particularity of the red heifer in the [[Jewish]] church, that it should be one upon which there never came yoke, is of all others the most striking, as typical of Christ; and the more so, be cause, among all the sacrifices under the law, it is the only one we ever meet with of such an appoint ment. There was no yoke, no obligation, upon Christ, but his own freewill, for which he became a sacrifice for his people. For although he glorified not himself to be either an high priest, or sacrifice, uncalled and unsent of God, yet equally certain it is, that without his own voluntary offering he could not have suited the purpose of our redemption. Hence he saith himself, (&nbsp;John 10:17-18) "Therefore doth my Father love me because [[I]] lay down my life, that [[I]] might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but [[I]] lay it down of myself; [[I]] have power to lay it down, and [[I]] have power to take it again. This commandment have [[I]] received of my Father." </p> <p> Fourthly, the heifer, to signify uncleanness, was "slain without the camp." And Jesus, that he "might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate," The apostle makes a most beautiful persuasive and unanswerable appeal to the church, in this view of Jesus, when he saith, "Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach;" (&nbsp;Hebrews 13:12-13) </p> <p> Fifthly, when the heifer had been slain, the blood was to be sprinkled directly before the tabernacle seven times. And it forms an express doc trine of the cross, the blood of sprinkling. As the tabernacle represented the whole church of Jesus, so all his people are supposed to be brought under the cleansing by the blood of Christ. [[Believers]] are said to have received the atonement. (&nbsp;Romans 5:11) Hence Paul, speaking of the privilege of the church, saith, "Ye are come to the blood of sprinkling." The blood of the heifer shed was not sufficient; it must be sprinkled. The blood of Christ is not only shed, but sprinkled, speaking peace from God to the sinner, and speaking of covenant faithfulness to God, in the infinite fulness of Christ's merits. Seven times performing the sprinkling of the blood of the heifer may probably mean, as [[Scripture]] numbers sometimes do, an indefinite number for a definite, by way of shewing the importance of it. The number seven is certainly used in Scripture with peculiar honour. The seven days of creation, the seventh day for the Sabbath, the seven times seven for the [[Sabbatical]] or [[Jubilee]] year, and the seventh day becoming an emblem of the everlasting [[Sabbath]] of heaven; all these are very high evidences of the peculiar honour conferred on the number. But no special reason other wise that [[I]] know of is given in the word of God for the consecration of seven to sacred things. </p> <p> Sixthly, the heifer was to be wholly burnt, no part nor portion exempted. So Christ is a whole Saviour. They that are looking to him for salvation must wholly look. "Is Christ divided?" saith the apostle. The completeness of acceptance in Jesus renders it essentially necessary that his people should look only to him, for the everlasting acceptance of their persons in him. "If righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain." (&nbsp;Galatians 2:21) </p> <p> Seventhly, the whole congregation are said to be alike interested in this heifer, both in providing it, and in the enjoyment of the privileges of it. So the Lord Jesus is said "to have given himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." (&nbsp;1 Timothy 2:6) And as we do not read in any other part of this ordinance being appointed to be observed but once, so nothing could more blessedly point out the everlasting efficacy of that "one offering of the body of Jesus Christ once offered, whereby he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." (&nbsp;Hebrews 10:14) </p> <p> The Jews have a tradition, that this one heifer, with the ashes of the water of purification, lasted for near a thousand years, until the time of the captivity. But of this we have no Scriptural authority. It is sufficient for [[Christians]] to behold Christ both preached to the ear, and set forth to the eye, in type and figure, under the law. And it is doubly blessed, under the gospel, to behold the whole fulfilled in the person, blood, and righteousness of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord give his people grace, while beholding the law as having "a shadow of good things to come," to know that Christ is the substance, and that Christ is indeed "the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth!" </p>
<p> Numbers 19. The ordinance was for cleansing, not atonement. Contact with death, the visible penalty of sin (&nbsp;Genesis 2:17), was a defilement requiring purgation before one could have communion with the congregation of the living [[Israel]] (&nbsp;Isaiah 4:3). The defilement being but ceremonial (though at the same time conveying instruction as to real defilement) needed only ceremonial cleansing. The victim was a female, whereas the greater offerings for sin were male. No part came on the altar; even the blood was not sprinkled there, but before the tabernacle, and not by the high priest but by his son. No charge was given as to its being burnt in a clean place, but simply "without the camp," entire with skin and dung. The "red" pointed not so much to the blood of Christ as to the earth color (adam ) or "red earth"), the flesh being the object of the purifying; also to sin, deep dyed as "scarlet," and associated with the flesh (&nbsp;Isaiah 1:18). </p> <p> The Mishna, [[Parah]] 3:2, states that the children sent to fetch water for the red heifer sacrifice from [[Siloam]] were mounted on bulls in order to have their feet off the ground, so as to escape pollution. Not the blood but the "ashes" were what purified the flesh; the blood-sprinkling before the tabernacle indicated a connection with atonement. The priest and the gatherer of the ashes remained unclean until evening, because the whole rite referred to defilement. A portion of the ashes mixed with running water was sprinkled on the unclean person, on the third and seventh days (a week, one revolution of time, being required before the cleansing was complete), with a bunch of hyssop; cedar wood and a bit of scarlet were also thrown into the fire that burnt the heifer. </p> <p> The hyssop's supposed detergent properties were the reason for its use; cedar from its durability and its odor counteracting corruption; scarlet, as being the life color and used as medicine to strengthen the heart, symbolized life. The meaning of the rite is divinely declared in &nbsp;Hebrews 9:13, "if the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" The [[Egyptian]] priests, the [[Persians]] according to the Zendavesta, the Romans, and Greeks, and the modern New Zealanders, have had strict rules as to defilement by contact with the dead. </p> <p> The widespread deaths in the camp owing to Korah's rebellion and its sequel suggested the enactment of a ceremony presently after, relieving the people of the dread of further penalty because of the defilement contracted by the presence of so many corpses, the sad evidences of sin's awful penalty, and perpetually teaching them to look forward to a deeper purgation by a greater atonement. The sinless [[Antitype]] had to bear the reproach of associating with sinners (&nbsp;Luke 5:30; &nbsp;Luke 15:2). As the heifer was east "without the camp," so Christ was cut off from fellowship with the representatives of the theocracy, and crucified between two thieves outside of [[Jerusalem]] (&nbsp;Hebrews 13:11-12). </p>
          
          
== Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible <ref name="term_53693" /> ==
== Morrish Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_66592" /> ==
<p> <strong> [[Red]] [[Heifer]] </strong> . The ashes of a ‘red heifer’ more correctly a red <em> cow </em> added to ‘running water,’ formed the most powerful means known to the Hebrews of removing the defilement produced by contact with a dead body. The method of preparing the ashes and the regulations for the application of the ‘water of impurity’ (see below) are the subject of a special section of the Priests’ Code (&nbsp; Numbers 19:1-22 ). It will be advisable to summarize the contents of the chapter, in the first place, and thereafter to inquire into the significance of the rite in the light of recent anthropological research. </p> <p> <strong> 1 </strong> . The chapter above cited consists of two parts; the first part, &nbsp; Numbers 19:1-13 , gives instructions for the preparation of the ashes, and (&nbsp; Numbers 19:11-13 ) for the removal by their means of the defilement contracted by actual contact with the dead body. The second part, &nbsp; Numbers 19:14-22 , is an expansion of &nbsp; Numbers 19:12 f., extending the application of ‘the water of impurity’ to uncleanness arising from a variety of sources connected with death. </p> <p> The animal whose ashes acquired this special virtue had to be of the female sex, of a red, or rather reddish-brown, colour, physically without blemish, and one that had never borne the yoke. The duty of superintending the burning, which took place ‘without the camp,’ was entrusted to a deputy of the high priest. The actual burning, however, was carried through by a lay assistant, which fact, taken along with the detail (&nbsp;Numbers 19:5 ) that every particle of the animal, <em> including the blood </em> , was burned, shows that we have not to do here with a ritual sacrifice, as might be inferred from the [[Ev]] [Note: English Version.] of &nbsp; Numbers 19:9 . The word there rendered ‘sin-offering’ properly denotes in this connexion (cf. &nbsp; Numbers 8:7 ) ‘a purification for sin’ ( <em> Oxf. Heb. Lex </em> . 310 a; cf. Sacrifice, [[§]] 14). The priest’s share in the ceremony was confined to the sprinkling of some of the blood ‘toward the front of the tent of meeting’ (&nbsp; Numbers 8:4 [[Rv]] [Note: Revised Version.] ), in token of the dedication of the animal to J″ [Note: Jahweh.] , and to the casting into the burning mass of a piece of cedar wood and a bunch of hyssop bound with a piece of scarlet cloth (such, at least, is the regulation of the [[Mishna]] treatise dealing with this subject). </p> <p> [[A]] third person the priest and his assistant having themselves [[Become]] ‘unclean’ through contact with these sacred things (see below) now gathered the ashes and laid them up ‘without the camp in a clean place,’ to be used as occasion required. The special name given to the mixture of ‘running water’ (&nbsp;Numbers 8:17 , lit. ‘living water,’ <em> i.e. </em> water from a spring, not a cistern) and the ashes is properly ‘water of impurity’ (&nbsp; Numbers 8:9; &nbsp; Numbers 8:13; &nbsp; Numbers 8:20-21 so RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.]; Amer. [[Rv]] [Note: Revised Version.] ‘water for impurity’; [[Ev]] [Note: English Version.] <strong> water of separation </strong> ), <em> i.e. </em> water for the removal of impurity or uncleanness. This powerful cathartic was applied to the person or thing to be cleansed, either by being thrown over them (see Gray, <em> Com </em> . on &nbsp; Numbers 8:13 ), or by being sprinkled with a sprinkler of hyssop (&nbsp; Numbers 8:18 ). This was done on the third and seventh days, after which the defiled person washed his person and garments, and was then restored to the privileges of the cult and the community. The only other reference to ‘the water of impurity’ is in the late passage, &nbsp; Numbers 31:23 . </p> <p> <strong> 2. </strong> The clue to the significance of the rite above described is found in the primitive conception of uncleanness, as this has been disclosed by modern anthropological research (see Clean and Unclean). In all primitive societies a dead body in particular is regarded as not only unclean in itself, but as capable of infecting with uncleanness all who come in contact with it or are even in proximity to it. The Semites shared these ideas with primitive communities in every part of the world. Hence, although the literary formulation of the rite of the Red Heifer in &nbsp; Numbers 19:1-22 may be late, the ideas and practices thereof are certainly older than the Hebrews themselves. </p> <p> While the central idea of the rite the efficacy of ashes as a cathartic, due probably to their connexion with fire (cf. &nbsp;Numbers 31:23 , and Farnell, <em> The [[Evolution]] of [[Religion]] </em> , 101 n. [Note: . note.] ) has its parallels elsewhere, the original significance of several of the details is still very obscure. This applies, for example, to the red colour of the cow, and to the addition to her ashes of the ‘cedar wood and hyssop and scarlet’ (for various suggestions see, in addition to Gray, <em> op. cit., </em> Hastings’ <em> [[Db]] </em> <em> [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] </em> iv. 208 ff.; Bewer in <em> [[Jbl]] </em> <em> [Note: [[Bl]] Journ. of Biblical Literature.] </em> xxiv. (1905) 42 ff., who suggests that the cow may have been originally a sacrifice to the dead). </p> <p> The value of the chapter for the student of [[Hebrew]] ritual lies in the illustration it affords of the primitive conceptions of uncleanness, especially of the uncleanness of the dead, and of the ‘contagiousness of holiness,’ the nature of which has been so clearly expounded by Robertson Smith (see <em> [[Rs]] </em> <em> [Note: [[S]] Religion of the Semites.] </em> 2 446ff. ‘Holiness, Uncleanness, and Taboo’). The ashes of the red heifer and the water of impurity here appear, in virtue of their intense ‘holiness,’ as ‘a conducting vehicle of a dangerous spiritual electricity’ (Farnell, <em> op. cit. </em> 95), and have the same power as the dead body of rendering unclean all who come in contact with them (see &nbsp; Numbers 31:7 ff., &nbsp; Numbers 31:21 f. and art. Clean and Unclean). </p> <p> There are no inventions in ritual, it has been said, only survivals, and in the rite under review we have one of the most interesting of these survivals. The remarks made in a previous article (Atonement [Day of]) are equally applicable to the present case. As re-interpreted by the compilers of the Priests’ Code, the rite conveys, in striking symbolism, the eternal truth that purity and holiness are the essential characteristics of the people of God. </p> <p> [[A.]] [[R.]] [[S.]] Kennedy. </p>
<p> This was a unique offering. The red heifer was killed outside the camp, and its blood was sprinkled by the priest seven times directly before the tabernacle. The whole of the heifer was then burnt, and the priest cast cedar wood, hyssop, and scarlet into the burning of the heifer. The ashes were gathered up and laid in a clean place outside the camp. When the ashes were used, a person that was clean mixed in a vessel some of the ashes with running water, then he dipped hyssop into the water, and sprinkled the person, tent, etc., that was unclean. It was a water of separation — a purification for sin. </p> <p> The ordinance of the red heifer was an exceptional form of sin offering. It had not atonement in view, but the cleansing by water of those who, having their dwelling and place in the camp, where Jehovah's sanctuary was, had become defiled by the way: cf. &nbsp;Numbers 5:1-4 . Upon the basis of sin being condemned in the cross, it corresponds to &nbsp;1 John 1:9 . The washing of the feet of those that are clean, as taught by the Lord in &nbsp;John 13 has this character of cleansing with water. The [[Holy]] Spirit applies, by the word, the truth of the condemnation of sin in the cross of Christ to the heart and conscience, to purify the believer, without applying the blood again. &nbsp; Numbers 19:1-22; &nbsp;Hebrews 9:13 . But &nbsp;John 13 goes further. The Lord applies the truth of His departure out of this world to the Father to the walk of His disciples. </p>
          
          
== Holman Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_43319" /> ==
== International Standard Bible Encyclopedia <ref name="term_4461" /> ==
&nbsp;Numbers 19:1&nbsp;Leviticus 14:4&nbsp;Hebrews 9:14&nbsp; Hebrews 6:1
<p> In &nbsp;Numbers 19 a rite is described in which the ashes of a "red heifer" and of certain objects are mixed with running water to obtain the so-called "water for impurity." (Such is the correct translation of the American Standard Revised Version in &nbsp; Numbers 19:9 , &nbsp;Numbers 19:13 , &nbsp;Numbers 19:10 , &nbsp;Numbers 19:21; &nbsp;Numbers 31:23 . In these passages, the King James Version and the English Revised Version, through a misunderstanding of a rather difficult [[Hebrew]] term, have "water of separation"; [[Septuagint]] and the [[Vulgate]] (Jerome's <i> Latin Bible </i> , 390-405 ad) have, "water of sprinkling." the English Revised Version margin, "water of impurity," is right, but ambiguous.) This water was employed in the removal of the uncleanness of a person or thing that had been in contact with a dead body, and also in removing ritual defilement from booty taken in war. </p> 1. Origin and Significance of the [[Rite]] <p> The general origin of the rite is clear enough, as is the fact that this origin lies back of the official sacrificial system of Israel. For the removal of impurity, ritual as well as physical, water, preferably running water (&nbsp;Numbers 19:17; compare &nbsp;Leviticus 14:5; &nbsp;Leviticus 15:13 ), is the natural means, and is employed universally. But where the impurity was unusually great, mere water was not felt to be adequate, and various substances were mixed with it in order to increase its efficacy. So (among other things) blood is used in &nbsp;Leviticus 14:6 , &nbsp;Leviticus 14:7 , and dust in &nbsp;Numbers 5:17 (see [[Water Of Bitterness]] ). The use, however, of ashes in &nbsp;Numbers 19:17 is unique in the Old Testament, although parallels from elsewhere can be adduced. So e.g. in [[Ovid]] <i> [[Fasti]] </i> , iv.639-40, 725, 733, in the last of these references, "The blood of a horse shall be a purification, and the ashes of calves," is remarkably close to the Old Testament. The ashes were obtained by burning the heifer completely, "her skin, and her flesh, and her blood, with her dung" (the contents of the entrails) (&nbsp;Numbers 19:5; compare &nbsp;Exodus 29:14 ). Here only in the Old [[Testament]] is blood burned for a ceremonial purpose, and here only is burning a <i> preliminary </i> ; elsewhere it is either a chief act or serves to consume the remnants of a finished sacrifice - &nbsp;Leviticus 4:12 and &nbsp; Numbers 19:3 are altogether different. </p> <p> The heifer is a <i> female </i> . For the regular sin offering for the congregation, only the male was permitted (&nbsp; Leviticus 4:14 ), but the female was used in the purificatory ceremony of &nbsp;Deuteronomy 21:3 (a rite that has several points of similarity to that of Nu 19). An individual sin offering by one of the common people, however, required a female (&nbsp; Leviticus 4:28 ), but probably only in order to give greater prominence to the more solemn sacrifices for which the male was reserved. A female is required again in the cases enumerated in &nbsp;Leviticus 5:1-6 , most of which are ritual defilements needing purification; a female was required at the purification of a leper (in addition to two males, &nbsp;Leviticus 14:10 ), and a female, with one male, was offered when a [[Nazirite]] terminated his vows (&nbsp;Numbers 6:14 ). Some connection between purification and the sacrifice of a female may be established by this list, for even in the case of the Nazirite the idea may be removal of the state of consecration. But the reason for such a connection is anything but obvious, and the various explanations that have been offered are hardly more than guesses. The most likely is that purificatory rites originated in a very primitive stage when the female was thought to be the more sacred animal on account of its greater usefulness. Of the other requirements for the heifer she must be "red," i.e. reddish brown (&nbsp;Numbers 19:2 ). [[Likeness]] in color to blood is at first sight the most natural explanation, but likeness in color to ripe grain is almost equally plausible. It may be noted that certain Egyptian sacrifices also required red cattle as victims (Plutarch, <i> De Isid </i> . 31). The heifer is to be "without spot" ("faultless"), "wherein is no blemish," the ordinary requirement for sacrifices. (The [[Jewish]] exegetes misread this "perfectly red, wherein is no blemish," with extraordinary results; see below.) But an advance on sacrificial requirements is that she shall be one "upon which never came yoke." This requirement is found elsewhere only in &nbsp;Deuteronomy 21:3 and in &nbsp; 1 Samuel 6:7 (that the animals in this last case were finally sacrificed is, however, not in point). But in other religions this requirement was very common (compare <i> [[Iliad]] </i> x.293; Vergil, <i> Georg </i> . iv.550-51; Ovid, <i> Fasti </i> iv.336). </p> 2. Use of Cedar and Hyssop <p> While the heifer was being burned, "cedar-wood, and hyssop, and scarlet" (i.e. scarlet wool or thread) were cast into the flames. The same combination of objects (although differently employed) is found at the cleansing of a leper (&nbsp;Leviticus 14:4 ), but their meaning is entirely unknown. The explanations offered are almost countless. It is quite clear that hyssop was especially prized in purifications (&nbsp;Psalm 51:7 ), but the use of hyssop as a sprinkler and the use of ashes of hyssop may be quite unrelated. Hyssop and cedar were supposed to have medicinal properties (see [[Cedar]]; [[Hyssop]] ). Or the point may be the use of aromatic woods. For a mixture of cedar and other substances in water as a purificatory medium compare Fossey, <i> Magie Assyrienne </i> , 285. The scarlet wool offers still greater difficulties, apart from the color, but it may be noted that scarlet wool plays a part in some of the [[Babylonian]] conjurations ( <i> [[Assyrian]] Bibl </i> ., Xii , 31). But, obviously, none of this leads very far and it may all be in the wrong direction. All that can be said definitely is that &nbsp;Leviticus 14:4 and &nbsp; Numbers 19:6 show that the combination of objects was deemed to have a high purificatory value. </p> 3. [[Application]] and Sacredness of the [[Ashes]] <p> The ashes, when obtained, were used in removing the greatest of impurities. Consequently, they themselves were deemed to have an extraordinarily "consecrated" character, and they were not to be handled carelessly. Their consecration extended to the rite by which they were produced, so that every person engaged in it was rendered unclean (&nbsp;Numbers 19:7 , &nbsp;Numbers 19:8 , &nbsp;Numbers 19:10 ), an excellent example of how in primitive religious thought the ideas of "holiness" and "uncleanness" blend. It was necessary to perform the whole ceremony "without the camp" (&nbsp;Numbers 19:3 ), and the ashes, when prepared, were also kept without the camp (&nbsp;Numbers 19:9 ), probably in order to guard against their touch defiling anyone (as well as to keep them from being defiled). When used they were mixed with running water, and the mixture was sprinkled with hyssop on the person or object to be cleansed (&nbsp;Numbers 19:17-19 ). The same water was used to purify booty (&nbsp;Numbers 31:23 ), and it <i> may </i> also be meant by the "water of expiation" in &nbsp; Numbers 8:7 . </p> 4. Of Non-Priestly and Non-Israelitish Origin <p> In addition to the similarities already pointed out between &nbsp;Numbers 19 and &nbsp; Deuteronomy 21:1-9 , the rites resemble each other also in the fact that, in both, laymen are the chief functionaries and that the priests have little to do (in &nbsp;Deuteronomy 21:1-9 they are mere passive witnesses). This suggests a non-priestly origin. The title "sin-offering" in &nbsp; Numbers 19:9 , &nbsp;Numbers 19:17 (unless used in a unique sense) points to an original sacrificial meaning, although in Nu 19 the heifer is carefully kept away from the altar. Again, the correspondences with rites in other religions indicate a non-Israelitish origin. Such a ceremony may well have passed among the [[Israelites]] and have become prized by them. It contained nothing objectionable and seemed to have much of deep worth, and a few slight additions - chiefly the sprinkling (&nbsp; Numbers 19:4; compare &nbsp;Leviticus 4:6 , &nbsp;Leviticus 4:17 ) - made it fit for adoption into the highest system. Some older features may have been eliminated also, but as to this, of course, there is no information. But, in any case, the ceremony is formed of separate rites that are exceedingly old and that are found in a great diversity of religions so that any elaborate symbolic interpretation of the details would seem to be without justification. The same result can be reached by comparing the countless symbolic interpretations that have been attempted in the past, for they differ hopelessly. As a matter of fact, the immense advance that has been gained in the understanding of the meaning of the Old Testament rites through the comparative study of religions has shown the futility of much that has been written on symbolism. That a [[Certain]] rite is widely practiced may merely mean that it rests on a true instinct. To be sure, the symbolism of the future will be written on broader lines and will be less pretentious in its claims, but for these very reasons it will rest on a more solid basis. At present, however, the chief task is the collection of material and its correct historical interpretation. </p> 5. [[Obscurity]] of Later History <p> The later history of the rite is altogether obscure. As no provision was made in &nbsp;Numbers 19 for sending the ashes to different points, the purification could have been practiced only by those living near the sanctuary. Rabbinical casuistry still further complicated. matters by providing that two black or white hairs from the same follicle would disqualify the heifer (see above), and that one on whom even a cloth had been laid could not be used. In consequence, it became virtually or altogether impossible to secure a proper animal, and the Mishnic statement that only nine had ever been found ( <i> ''''' Pārāh ''''' </i> , iii.5) probably means that the rite had been obsolete long before New Testament times. Still, the existence of the tractate, <i> ''''' Pārāh ''''' </i> , and the mention in &nbsp; Hebrews 9:13 show that the provisions were well remembered. See also [[Sacrifice]] . </p> Literature <p> Baentsch (1903), Holzinger (1903), and (especially) Grey (1903) on Nu; Kennedy in <i> Hdb </i> ; Edersheim, <i> [[Temple]] and [[Ministry]] </i> , chapter 18 (rabbinic traditions. Edersheim gives the best of the "typological" explanations). </p>
       
== Morrish Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_68413" /> ==
<p> See [[Heifer,]] [[Red.]] </p>
          
          
==References ==
==References ==
<references>
<references>


<ref name="term_48639"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/hawker-s-poor-man-s-concordance-and-dictionary/red+heifer Red Heifer from Hawker's Poor Man's Concordance And Dictionary]</ref>
<ref name="term_35645"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/fausset-s-bible-dictionary/heifer,+red Red Heifer from Fausset's Bible Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_53693"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/hastings-dictionary-of-the-bible/red+heifer Red Heifer from Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible]</ref>
          
          
<ref name="term_43319"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/holman-bible-dictionary/red+heifer Red Heifer from Holman Bible Dictionary]</ref>
<ref name="term_66592"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/morrish-bible-dictionary/heifer,+red Red Heifer from Morrish Bible Dictionary]</ref>
          
          
<ref name="term_68413"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/morrish-bible-dictionary/red+heifer Red Heifer from Morrish Bible Dictionary]</ref>
<ref name="term_4461"> [https://bibleportal.com/encyclopedia/international-standard-bible-encyclopedia/heifer,+red Red Heifer from International Standard Bible Encyclopedia]</ref>
          
          
</references>
</references>

Revision as of 10:42, 13 October 2021

Fausset's Bible Dictionary [1]

Numbers 19. The ordinance was for cleansing, not atonement. Contact with death, the visible penalty of sin ( Genesis 2:17), was a defilement requiring purgation before one could have communion with the congregation of the living Israel ( Isaiah 4:3). The defilement being but ceremonial (though at the same time conveying instruction as to real defilement) needed only ceremonial cleansing. The victim was a female, whereas the greater offerings for sin were male. No part came on the altar; even the blood was not sprinkled there, but before the tabernacle, and not by the high priest but by his son. No charge was given as to its being burnt in a clean place, but simply "without the camp," entire with skin and dung. The "red" pointed not so much to the blood of Christ as to the earth color (adam ) or "red earth"), the flesh being the object of the purifying; also to sin, deep dyed as "scarlet," and associated with the flesh ( Isaiah 1:18).

The Mishna, Parah 3:2, states that the children sent to fetch water for the red heifer sacrifice from Siloam were mounted on bulls in order to have their feet off the ground, so as to escape pollution. Not the blood but the "ashes" were what purified the flesh; the blood-sprinkling before the tabernacle indicated a connection with atonement. The priest and the gatherer of the ashes remained unclean until evening, because the whole rite referred to defilement. A portion of the ashes mixed with running water was sprinkled on the unclean person, on the third and seventh days (a week, one revolution of time, being required before the cleansing was complete), with a bunch of hyssop; cedar wood and a bit of scarlet were also thrown into the fire that burnt the heifer.

The hyssop's supposed detergent properties were the reason for its use; cedar from its durability and its odor counteracting corruption; scarlet, as being the life color and used as medicine to strengthen the heart, symbolized life. The meaning of the rite is divinely declared in  Hebrews 9:13, "if the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" The Egyptian priests, the Persians according to the Zendavesta, the Romans, and Greeks, and the modern New Zealanders, have had strict rules as to defilement by contact with the dead.

The widespread deaths in the camp owing to Korah's rebellion and its sequel suggested the enactment of a ceremony presently after, relieving the people of the dread of further penalty because of the defilement contracted by the presence of so many corpses, the sad evidences of sin's awful penalty, and perpetually teaching them to look forward to a deeper purgation by a greater atonement. The sinless Antitype had to bear the reproach of associating with sinners ( Luke 5:30;  Luke 15:2). As the heifer was east "without the camp," so Christ was cut off from fellowship with the representatives of the theocracy, and crucified between two thieves outside of Jerusalem ( Hebrews 13:11-12).

Morrish Bible Dictionary [2]

This was a unique offering. The red heifer was killed outside the camp, and its blood was sprinkled by the priest seven times directly before the tabernacle. The whole of the heifer was then burnt, and the priest cast cedar wood, hyssop, and scarlet into the burning of the heifer. The ashes were gathered up and laid in a clean place outside the camp. When the ashes were used, a person that was clean mixed in a vessel some of the ashes with running water, then he dipped hyssop into the water, and sprinkled the person, tent, etc., that was unclean. It was a water of separation — a purification for sin.

The ordinance of the red heifer was an exceptional form of sin offering. It had not atonement in view, but the cleansing by water of those who, having their dwelling and place in the camp, where Jehovah's sanctuary was, had become defiled by the way: cf.  Numbers 5:1-4 . Upon the basis of sin being condemned in the cross, it corresponds to  1 John 1:9 . The washing of the feet of those that are clean, as taught by the Lord in  John 13 has this character of cleansing with water. The Holy Spirit applies, by the word, the truth of the condemnation of sin in the cross of Christ to the heart and conscience, to purify the believer, without applying the blood again.   Numbers 19:1-22;  Hebrews 9:13 . But  John 13 goes further. The Lord applies the truth of His departure out of this world to the Father to the walk of His disciples.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia [3]

In  Numbers 19 a rite is described in which the ashes of a "red heifer" and of certain objects are mixed with running water to obtain the so-called "water for impurity." (Such is the correct translation of the American Standard Revised Version in   Numbers 19:9 ,  Numbers 19:13 ,  Numbers 19:10 ,  Numbers 19:21;  Numbers 31:23 . In these passages, the King James Version and the English Revised Version, through a misunderstanding of a rather difficult Hebrew term, have "water of separation"; Septuagint and the Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible , 390-405 ad) have, "water of sprinkling." the English Revised Version margin, "water of impurity," is right, but ambiguous.) This water was employed in the removal of the uncleanness of a person or thing that had been in contact with a dead body, and also in removing ritual defilement from booty taken in war.

1. Origin and Significance of the Rite

The general origin of the rite is clear enough, as is the fact that this origin lies back of the official sacrificial system of Israel. For the removal of impurity, ritual as well as physical, water, preferably running water ( Numbers 19:17; compare  Leviticus 14:5;  Leviticus 15:13 ), is the natural means, and is employed universally. But where the impurity was unusually great, mere water was not felt to be adequate, and various substances were mixed with it in order to increase its efficacy. So (among other things) blood is used in  Leviticus 14:6 ,  Leviticus 14:7 , and dust in  Numbers 5:17 (see Water Of Bitterness ). The use, however, of ashes in  Numbers 19:17 is unique in the Old Testament, although parallels from elsewhere can be adduced. So e.g. in Ovid Fasti , iv.639-40, 725, 733, in the last of these references, "The blood of a horse shall be a purification, and the ashes of calves," is remarkably close to the Old Testament. The ashes were obtained by burning the heifer completely, "her skin, and her flesh, and her blood, with her dung" (the contents of the entrails) ( Numbers 19:5; compare  Exodus 29:14 ). Here only in the Old Testament is blood burned for a ceremonial purpose, and here only is burning a preliminary  ; elsewhere it is either a chief act or serves to consume the remnants of a finished sacrifice -  Leviticus 4:12 and   Numbers 19:3 are altogether different.

The heifer is a female . For the regular sin offering for the congregation, only the male was permitted (  Leviticus 4:14 ), but the female was used in the purificatory ceremony of  Deuteronomy 21:3 (a rite that has several points of similarity to that of Nu 19). An individual sin offering by one of the common people, however, required a female (  Leviticus 4:28 ), but probably only in order to give greater prominence to the more solemn sacrifices for which the male was reserved. A female is required again in the cases enumerated in  Leviticus 5:1-6 , most of which are ritual defilements needing purification; a female was required at the purification of a leper (in addition to two males,  Leviticus 14:10 ), and a female, with one male, was offered when a Nazirite terminated his vows ( Numbers 6:14 ). Some connection between purification and the sacrifice of a female may be established by this list, for even in the case of the Nazirite the idea may be removal of the state of consecration. But the reason for such a connection is anything but obvious, and the various explanations that have been offered are hardly more than guesses. The most likely is that purificatory rites originated in a very primitive stage when the female was thought to be the more sacred animal on account of its greater usefulness. Of the other requirements for the heifer she must be "red," i.e. reddish brown ( Numbers 19:2 ). Likeness in color to blood is at first sight the most natural explanation, but likeness in color to ripe grain is almost equally plausible. It may be noted that certain Egyptian sacrifices also required red cattle as victims (Plutarch, De Isid . 31). The heifer is to be "without spot" ("faultless"), "wherein is no blemish," the ordinary requirement for sacrifices. (The Jewish exegetes misread this "perfectly red, wherein is no blemish," with extraordinary results; see below.) But an advance on sacrificial requirements is that she shall be one "upon which never came yoke." This requirement is found elsewhere only in  Deuteronomy 21:3 and in   1 Samuel 6:7 (that the animals in this last case were finally sacrificed is, however, not in point). But in other religions this requirement was very common (compare Iliad x.293; Vergil, Georg . iv.550-51; Ovid, Fasti iv.336).

2. Use of Cedar and Hyssop

While the heifer was being burned, "cedar-wood, and hyssop, and scarlet" (i.e. scarlet wool or thread) were cast into the flames. The same combination of objects (although differently employed) is found at the cleansing of a leper ( Leviticus 14:4 ), but their meaning is entirely unknown. The explanations offered are almost countless. It is quite clear that hyssop was especially prized in purifications ( Psalm 51:7 ), but the use of hyssop as a sprinkler and the use of ashes of hyssop may be quite unrelated. Hyssop and cedar were supposed to have medicinal properties (see Cedar; Hyssop ). Or the point may be the use of aromatic woods. For a mixture of cedar and other substances in water as a purificatory medium compare Fossey, Magie Assyrienne , 285. The scarlet wool offers still greater difficulties, apart from the color, but it may be noted that scarlet wool plays a part in some of the Babylonian conjurations ( Assyrian Bibl ., Xii , 31). But, obviously, none of this leads very far and it may all be in the wrong direction. All that can be said definitely is that  Leviticus 14:4 and   Numbers 19:6 show that the combination of objects was deemed to have a high purificatory value.

3. Application and Sacredness of the Ashes

The ashes, when obtained, were used in removing the greatest of impurities. Consequently, they themselves were deemed to have an extraordinarily "consecrated" character, and they were not to be handled carelessly. Their consecration extended to the rite by which they were produced, so that every person engaged in it was rendered unclean ( Numbers 19:7 ,  Numbers 19:8 ,  Numbers 19:10 ), an excellent example of how in primitive religious thought the ideas of "holiness" and "uncleanness" blend. It was necessary to perform the whole ceremony "without the camp" ( Numbers 19:3 ), and the ashes, when prepared, were also kept without the camp ( Numbers 19:9 ), probably in order to guard against their touch defiling anyone (as well as to keep them from being defiled). When used they were mixed with running water, and the mixture was sprinkled with hyssop on the person or object to be cleansed ( Numbers 19:17-19 ). The same water was used to purify booty ( Numbers 31:23 ), and it may also be meant by the "water of expiation" in   Numbers 8:7 .

4. Of Non-Priestly and Non-Israelitish Origin

In addition to the similarities already pointed out between  Numbers 19 and   Deuteronomy 21:1-9 , the rites resemble each other also in the fact that, in both, laymen are the chief functionaries and that the priests have little to do (in  Deuteronomy 21:1-9 they are mere passive witnesses). This suggests a non-priestly origin. The title "sin-offering" in   Numbers 19:9 ,  Numbers 19:17 (unless used in a unique sense) points to an original sacrificial meaning, although in Nu 19 the heifer is carefully kept away from the altar. Again, the correspondences with rites in other religions indicate a non-Israelitish origin. Such a ceremony may well have passed among the Israelites and have become prized by them. It contained nothing objectionable and seemed to have much of deep worth, and a few slight additions - chiefly the sprinkling (  Numbers 19:4; compare  Leviticus 4:6 ,  Leviticus 4:17 ) - made it fit for adoption into the highest system. Some older features may have been eliminated also, but as to this, of course, there is no information. But, in any case, the ceremony is formed of separate rites that are exceedingly old and that are found in a great diversity of religions so that any elaborate symbolic interpretation of the details would seem to be without justification. The same result can be reached by comparing the countless symbolic interpretations that have been attempted in the past, for they differ hopelessly. As a matter of fact, the immense advance that has been gained in the understanding of the meaning of the Old Testament rites through the comparative study of religions has shown the futility of much that has been written on symbolism. That a Certain rite is widely practiced may merely mean that it rests on a true instinct. To be sure, the symbolism of the future will be written on broader lines and will be less pretentious in its claims, but for these very reasons it will rest on a more solid basis. At present, however, the chief task is the collection of material and its correct historical interpretation.

5. Obscurity of Later History

The later history of the rite is altogether obscure. As no provision was made in  Numbers 19 for sending the ashes to different points, the purification could have been practiced only by those living near the sanctuary. Rabbinical casuistry still further complicated. matters by providing that two black or white hairs from the same follicle would disqualify the heifer (see above), and that one on whom even a cloth had been laid could not be used. In consequence, it became virtually or altogether impossible to secure a proper animal, and the Mishnic statement that only nine had ever been found ( Pārāh , iii.5) probably means that the rite had been obsolete long before New Testament times. Still, the existence of the tractate, Pārāh , and the mention in   Hebrews 9:13 show that the provisions were well remembered. See also Sacrifice .

Literature

Baentsch (1903), Holzinger (1903), and (especially) Grey (1903) on Nu; Kennedy in Hdb  ; Edersheim, Temple and Ministry , chapter 18 (rabbinic traditions. Edersheim gives the best of the "typological" explanations).

References

  1. ↑ Red Heifer from Fausset's Bible Dictionary
  2. ↑ Red Heifer from Morrish Bible Dictionary
  3. ↑ Red Heifer from International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
Retrieved from "http://wiki.bibleportal.com/index.php?title=Red_Heifer&oldid=319150"