4

If the sin offering was offered to cover the sins of the anointed priest (Lev 4:3) then the priest wasn't free to eat ANY part of the animal. God got His part, but the rest of the animal - including its head and entrails - were burnt outside the camp (Lev 4:11).

But if the sin offering was offered for the common people, it seems as though the rules changed. The Lord still received His part (the blood, fat, kidneys and fatty lobe above the liver etc) but the priests were free to eat the remainder of the animal (Lev 6: 26). However, does this mean they were free to eat EVERYTHING including the entrails (e.g. stomach, tongue and liver etc) or was he only free to eat the muscle meat?

I assume he was free to eat even the entrails because back in Leviticus chapter 4, the entrails were part and parcel of the 'remainder' of the animals.

Marisa De More
  • 49
  • 1
  • 3

4 Answers4

1

That they could eat the 'entrails', I would say no, since under that context (elsewhere translated 'fat' – Exd 23:18) it was that which went on the altar (e.g. Lev 7:31;33,16:25), though I am not claiming the two terms are necessarily synonymous.

The priests could eat of a burnt offering, the flesh (Lev 7:8), of a peace offering, the wave breast and the heave shoulder, of a sin offering, if it were a bullock and its blood was brought into the holy place then it wasn't eaten, and if a goat (excepting Lev 16:15), most likely that according to the burnt offering (i.e. the flesh, Lev 7:8), since its related offering, the trespass offering (Lev 7:7), put the entrails on the altar, and since also its altar portion was given according to that of the peace offering (Lev 4:31, 3:9-11). Also noted is the distinction between the two types of altar preparations (Lev 17:8-9).

LаngLаngС
  • 620
  • 1
  • 6
  • 18
user21676
  • 430
  • 3
  • 7
  • At the first Passover, the Israelites ate roasted lamb liver (Exodus 9:12). If God allowed Israel to eat the entrails then, I wondered if He allowed them to eat some of the entrails (but not the kidneys) of certain sacrifices later on. Thanks for your reply, I'll check out those Scriptures. – Marisa De More Apr 16 '18 at 10:18
  • @MarisaDeMore Exodus 12:9 is not an instruction to "eat" the entrails, but that the whole animal be roasted with fire. Verse 10 goes on to say, "and that which remaineth of it until the morning ye shall burn with fire." There is certainly no prohibition concerning any part of the animal, but your statement that "the Israelites ate roasted lamb liver" seems to me like something you'd prefer to believe, rather than something declared in the text. – enegue Apr 22 '18 at 09:59
  • @enegue Wow, how clever to be able to read my heart and gather my statements are based on what I'd prefer to believe rather than what the text states. Cool, wish I had that skill ;-) And here’s me thinking the text said don’t leave anything of what you cook uneaten, but if anything you’ve cooked (muscle meat and entrails) remains uneaten, then burn it with fire. True, I could be wrong, by God’s grace I stay open to correction. – Marisa De More May 30 '18 at 16:42
0

Exodus 12:8 says they were to eat the flesh not entrails. What was left must be burned with fire. Exodus 12:10.

The fat blood entrails were for Yahweh and was not eaten by the priests. Exodus 23:18

agarza
  • 4,297
  • 6
  • 15
  • 32
user57250
  • 1
0

I thought that they could only eat the breast and right thigh of the sin offering, peace offering and trespass offering. Leviticus 7:28-34. I know the priests were given the flesh and the hide of the animal unless it was to make atonement for the priests or the whole congregation. Then they would bring what remains of the animal outside the camp and burn the rest of the animal (Leviticus 4) it's flesh and it's hide, but the fat and the blood belonged to the Lord. Did the priests eat any other part of the animal besides the breasts and right thigh? I need scripture references. Does the bible talk about them eating any other part of the animal? If the common people or a Ruler of the people gave a sin offering, the priest would receive what remained from the offering (God would get the fat). But does this mean that they actually ate the rest of it? Why then would God point out that the portion of the animal for the priests to have as food was the breasts and right thigh? I need scripture references that say they could eat the rest of the flesh?

Christine
  • 11
  • 1
0

It's an interesting question because there is an ancient document that suggests that the entrails of the sin-offering were eaten by the priests, howbeit in the prophetic/spiritual sense of their sin against Jesus at the cross.

The reference is located in the "Epistle of Barnabas," an early Christian (largely allegorical) work, adjudged written in the period c.AD70-132 (ref. below) and much reliant upon a LXX translation of the Scriptures.

(The Apostolic Fathers, The Epistle of Barnabas, trans. Lightfoot J.B, Harmer J.R, revised Holmes M.W, pub. Apollos, 1989: pp.160 & 171,7v4)

Quote: (4) 'What, therefore, does he say in the prophet? "And let them eat from the goat that is offered at the fast for all their sins" - pay attention - "and let the priests (but only them) eat the unwashed entrails with vinegar." (5) Why? "Since you are going to give me, when I am about to offer my flesh for the sins of my new people, gall with vinegar to drink, you alone must eat, while the people fast and lament in sackcloth and ashes" - this was to show that he must suffer at their hands.'

(The exact source of the reference quoted in the 'epistle' is unknown. )

Note: Jesus refused to drink the gall and vinegar that was offered to Him at His crucifixion (Mark 15:23).

NorM
  • 1