Matthew Henry on Leviticus 1:3-9
If a man were rich and could afford it, it is supposed that he would bring his burnt-sacrifice, with which he designed to honour God, out of his herd of larger cattle. He that considers that God is the best that is will resolve to give him the best he has, else he gives him not the glory due unto his name. Now if a man determined to kill a bullock, not for an entertainment for his family and friends, but for a sacrifice to his God, these rules must be religiously observed: - 1. The beast to be offered must be a male, and without blemish, and the best he had in his pasture. Being designed purely for the honour of him that is infinitely perfect, it ought to be the most perfect in its kind. Thi…
Read the whole note in the consoleJamieson-Fausset-Brown on Leviticus 1:4
shall put his hand upon the head--This was a significant act which implied not only that the offerer devoted the animal to God, but that he confessed his consciousness of sin and prayed that his guilt and its punishment might be transferred to the victim.
and it shall be--rather, "that it may be an acceptable atonement."
Adam Clarke on Leviticus 1:4
He shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt-offering - By the imposition of hands the person bringing the victim acknowledged,
1. The sacrifice as his own.
2. That he offered it as an atonement for his sins.
3. That he was worthy of death because he had sinned, having forfeited his life by breaking the law.
4. That he entreated God to accept the life of the innocent animal in place of his own.
5. And all this, to be done profitably, must have respect to Him whose life, in the fullness of time, should be made a sacrifice for sin.
6. The blood was to be sprinkled round about upon the altar, Lev 1:5, as by the sprinkling of blood the atonement was made; for the blood was the life of the be…
Read the whole note in the consoleJohn Gill on Leviticus 1:4
And he shall put his hand on the head of the burnt offering,.... According to the Targum of Jonathan, it was his right hand; but it is generally thought by the Jewish writers that both hands were laid on; so Ben Gersom and Aben Ezra, with whom Maimonides (e) agrees, who says, he that lays on hands ought to lay on with all his strength, with both his hands upon the head of the beast, as it is said, "upon the head of the burnt offering": not upon the neck, nor upon the sides; and there should be nothing between his hands and the beast: and as the same writer says (f), it must be his own hand, and not the hand of his wife, nor the hand of his servant, nor his messenger; and who also observes (g…
