The Expositor's Bible: The Book of LeviticusKellogg, Samuel H. (Samuel Henry)
Religion
The Expositor's Bible: The Book of Leviticus
Kellogg, Samuel H. (Samuel Henry)
Bible. Leviticus -- Commentaries; Bible. Leviticus -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
In the first place, this exposition being granted, it follows, as a
present-day lesson of great moment, that the holiness which God
requires has to do with the body as well as the soul, even with such
commonplace matters as our eating and drinking. This is so, because
the body is the instrument and organ of the soul, with which it must
do all its work on earth for God, and because, as such, the body, no
less than the soul, has been redeemed unto God by the blood of His
Son. There is, therefore, no religion in neglecting the body, and
ignoring the requirements for its health, as ascetics have in all ages
imagined. Neither is there religion in pampering, and thus abusing,
the body, after the manner of the sensual in all ages. The principle
which inspires this chapter is that which is expressed in the New
Testament by the words: "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or
whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God" (1 Cor. x. 31). If,
therefore, a man needlessly eats such things, or in such a manner, as
may be injurious to health, he sins, and has come short of the law of
perfect holiness. It is therefore not merely a matter of earthly
prudence to observe the laws of health in food and drink and
recreation, in a word, in all that has to do with the appetite and
desires of the body, but it is essential to holiness. We are in all
these things to seek to glorify God, not only in our souls, but also
in our bodies.
The momentous importance of this thought will the more clearly appear
when we recall to mind that, according to the law of Moses (v. 2), if
a man was defiled by any unclean thing, and neglected the cleansing
ordered by this law, even though it were through ignorance or
forgetfulness, he was held to have incurred guilt before God. For it
was therein declared that when a man defiled by contact with the dead,
or any unclean thing, should for any reason have omitted the cleansing
ordered, his covenant relation with God could only be re-established
on his presentation of a sin-offering. By parity of reasoning it
follows that the case is the same now; and that God will hold no man
guiltless who violates any of those laws which He has established in
nature as the conditions of bodily health. He who does this is guilty
of a sin which requires the application of the great atonement.
How needful it is even in our day to remind men of all this, could not
be better illustrated than by the already mentioned argument of many
expositors, that hygienic principles cannot have dominated and
determined the details of these laws, because the law declares that
they are grounded, not in hygiene, but in religion, and have to do
with holiness. As if these two were exclusive, one of the other, and
as if it made no difference in respect to holiness of character
whether a man took care to have a sound body or not!
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account