Exodus 29:14

Exo 29:14 But the flesh of the bullock, and his skin, and his dung, shalt thou burn with fire without the camp: it [is] a sin offering.

Ver. 14. Without the camp.] {See Trapp on "Heb 13:12"} {See Trapp on "Heb 7:27"} {See Trapp on "Heb 7:28"}

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

29:14 The remains represented what was unclean in human behavior. • sin offering: See Lev 4.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Hebrew, sin, 2 Cor. 5:21.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Verse 14. It is a sin-offering.] See Clarke on Ge 4:7; "Ge 13:13"; "Le 7:1", &c.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(14) The flesh . . . shalt thou burn . . . with out the camp.—Comp. Lev_4:11-12; Lev_4:21; Heb_13:11-13. This was the general rule with sin offerings. The whole animal was reckoned too impure for any portion of it to be suitable for human food.

His dung.—That which the intestines contained at the time of death.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

14. When a sin-offering was offered for priests, or for the whole community, including the priests, its flesh was burnt (cf. Lev_4:11 f., 21, Exo_9:11); when it was offered for laymen, the flesh was eaten by the priests (Lev_5:13; Lev_6:26). Though the priests are here treated as laity (see on v. 12), the flesh is to be burnt, because no proper priest is present to eat it (Di.).

dung] better, for distinction, offal,—viz. that removed from the animals offered in sacrifice: Lev_4:11; Lev_8:17; Lev_16:27, Num_19:5, Mal_2:3†.

a sin offering] see on Leviticus 4.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But the flesh of the bullock, and his skin, and his dung,.... The several parts and members of him, head, legs, feet, &c. and the skin taken off of him, and the dung that comes from him. Aben Ezra observes, that the flesh comprehends the head and the pieces, and may be interpreted in a way of conjecture, that he washed it, and afterwards burnt it; all representing a whole Christ under all his painful sufferings, and the shame and reproach he underwent in them:

shalt thou burn with fire without the camp; so Christ, the antitype, suffered without the gates of Jerusalem a most painful and shameful death, despised and reproached by men, and the wrath of God like fire poured out upon him: the apostle seems to refer to this, Heb 13:11,

it is a sin offering; in order to make atonement for the sins of Aaron and his sons; for the law made men priests that had infirmity, and needed offerings and sacrifices for their own sins, which shows the imperfection of the Aaronic priesthood.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Sin of the high priest and people. In the other sin-offerings, this was not done. (Menochius)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

To wit, for the high priest, as is plain from the whole context, and therefore ought to be burnt by that law, Le 4. There was indeed a law, that that sin-offering whose blood was not carried into the tabernacle, which was the case here, should not be burnt, but eaten, Lev 6:30; 10:18. But that concerned the people, not the priests, who did not eat, but burn their own sin-offerings, Lev 4:3,12.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

14. A sin offering — On the nature of which see notes on Lev_4:3-12.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The flesh shalt thou burn with fire without the camp. Such was the rule with sin-offerings generally. (Lev_4:11, Lev_4:12) The curse of sin which was on them, made them unfit for food and even unworthy of burial within the comp. On the symbolism of the burial, see Heb_13:11-13. His dung. That which the bowels contained at the time of death.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

תשרף באש SHALT THOU BURN WITH FIRE — We do not find that any “outside” sin offering was to be burnt except this (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 9:11).

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.

THOU SHALT BURN WITH FIRE WITHOUT THE CAMP; IT IS A SIN-OFFERING. “We do not find any outside sin-offering was one the blood of which was sprinkled within the Sanctuary — upon the veil in front of the Holy of Holies and the golden altar; that kind of a sin-offering was burnt completely outside the camp (Leviticus 6:23). Such a sacrifice, for example, was the sin-offering of the High Priest (ibid., 4:3-12). An outside sin-offering was one the blood of which was sprinkled upon the outer altar that stood in the court of the Tabernacle [or Sanctuary]. Of such a sin-offering only certain fats were burnt on the altar, and the meat eaten by the priests. Since the sin-offering mentioned here was an outside sacrifice, and yet it was to the burnt wholly outside of the camp, it must have been a temporary, special legislation. sin-offering that was to be burnt except this.” Thus is Rashi’s language. It was a temporary, special legislation, according to the words of our Rabbis. The reason for this is, that everything being foreseen by Him, this sin-offering was to effect forgiveness for the making of the golden calf, and it was the sacrifice of the anointed priest; and there [in the Book of Leviticus] He was to command that the blood of the sin-offering [of the High Priest] be brought within [the Tent of Meeting and sprinkled in front of] the veil, [and the sacrifice be burnt outside the camp, Verse 12. Hence He commanded here — in advance — that that sin-offering was to be burnt.]. At present, however, He did not wish to mention that [the blood be brought] within the Tent, for there [in the Book of Leviticus] He says in discernment, [that he sprinkle the blood] in front of the holy veil, and at this point [the Tabernacle] had not yet been sanctified, and the Divine Glory did not yet dwell upon it, that it be called “the holy veil.” Thus the outside sin-offering [mentioned here] was like the inner one [of the anointed priest]. The laying of hands was [also] by Aaron’s sons, [although if it was deemed to be Aaron’s sin-offering the laying of hands should have been done only by Aaron], because He was angry with Aaron to have destroyed him, which means the extermination of his children, therefore they too needed atonement by this sin-offering. The reason for burning [such a sin-offering outside the camp] is the same as the reason for burning the Red Heifer there, and the secret thereof is known from [the text concerning] the goat sent to Azazel.

Ramban (Nachmanides) on the Tanakh — English translation: “Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.