Your question is a valid one, so I looked up what Andrew Jukes says in The Law of the Offerings, which focuses on typology. First, the class of offerings this passage belongs to is the Whole Burnt Offering and the Fowl is the third variety of that offering, which also includes varieties from the Herd and from the Flock.
Characteristics of the Whole Burnt Offering that distinguish it from the other offerings are is it was (1.) A sweet savour offering, and, (2.) Offered for acceptance, both of which differ from the Sin Offering. (3.) It was the offering of a life, unlike the Meat-offering. (4.) It was wholly burn, unlike any other offering.
(1.) and (2.) pertain to the pleasing nature and acceptance of Christ's obedience offered on our behalf to God, rather than his atonement for our sin. (3.) The life yielded is man's duty to God, and man here is seen perfectly giving it. (4.) It fulfills the first commandment of love for God with all thy heart, all thy soul and all they mind.
The 3 varieties or grades of the offering pertain to the worshippers apprehension of Christ and differ in (1.) The animal offered as it relates to man's duties of labor (bullock), submission (lamb), and innocence (turtle-dove). (2.) The division of the animal into parts (bullock and lamb) shows appreciation for numerous qualities of Christ's obedience vs killed by ringing/tearing but not divided (turtle-dove) show a generalized view of Christ's obedience. (3.) Hands are laid on the animal (bullock) showing identification with Christ's sacrifice vs no hands laid on (lamb and turtle-dove) objectively observing Christ's sacrifice. (4.) The worshipper kills the animal (bullock and lamb) sets Christ before us in His person vs the Priest kills it (turtle-dove) represents Him in His official character as appointed Mediator between man and God.
I add (5.) Everything burnt as clean after washing w/ water/word (bullock and lamb) vs discard a portion as unfit for burning shows a weak conscience.
Jukes commentary on the Whole Burnt Offering is an entire chapter in his book and is much more in depth than what I have summarized, so I am sure I have missed several particulars and subtleties in what he wrote, but I think this summary gives a good indication of how he applied topology to this class of offering and its varieties by noting key similarities and distinctions between each class and each variety.
Strong's concordance suggests the Hebrew word translated "crop" in Leviticus 1 means "Conspicuousness" or "prominence." The word "feathers" in Lev. 1 suggests "plumage" and the same word is translated in Ezekiel 17 as "feathers" and in Job 39 as "ostrich."
Ezekiel 17
3 And say, Thus saith the Lord God; A great eagle with great wings, longwinged, full of feathers, which had divers colours, came unto Lebanon, and took the highest branch of the cedar:
Job 39:13
Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks? or wings and feathers unto the ostrich?
These associations with the words "crop" and "feathers" in other passages lead me to believe the "glory" of the birds was removed and cast aside before the bird was burnt as an offering.
To draw an application, before Christians can offer their bodies an acceptable sacrifice to God their own "glory" must be discarded.
Romans 12:1
I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
Psalm 51:17
The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.
And he shall pluck away his crop with his feathers, and cast it beside the altar on the east part, by the place of the ashes:
First of all I wasn't sure what a "crop" was, so I googled it and found this definition on Wikipedia:
"A crop (sometimes also called a croup or a craw, ingluvies, or sublingual pouch) is a thin-walled expanded portion of the alimentary tract used for the storage of food prior to digestion. This anatomical structure is found in a wide variety of animals. It has been found in birds, and in invertebrate animals including gastropods (snails and slugs), earthworms, leeches, and insects.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers says:
"His crop with his feathers.-Just as in the case of quadrupeds the skin was flayed off the victim before it was put on the altar fire, so the feathers were removed from the bird before its body was placed on the altar. This is the natural sense which is to be expected from the context, since it can hardly be imagined that the victims would be burnt with the feathers, and thus cause an intolerable smell. The rendering, however, given in the margin, "with the filth thereof," is now adopted by the greater number of expositors. As the two words filth and feathers resemble each other in Hebrew, it is probable that one of them has dropped out of the text. The maw, therefore, with its contents, as well as the feathers, were removed to the eastern side of the altar, where the ashes from the altar were thrown ( Leviticus 6:3)."
Barnes' Notes on the Bible is typical of those that go with the marginal reading:
"His crop with his feathers - The weight of authority is in favor of the marginal rendering. It is most probable that the feathers were burned with the body, and that the wings, mentioned in Leviticus 1:17, were not mutilated."
Unlike larger animals, many commentators say the small size of the offering limited what the priest could do to make these parts acceptable for the alter, so they were cast away
Characteristics of the Whole Burnt Offering that distinguish it from the other offerings are is it was (1.) A sweet savour offering, and, (2.) Offered for acceptance, both of which differ from the Sin Offering. (3.) It was the offering of a life, unlike the Meat-offering. (4.) It was wholly burn, unlike any other offering.
(1.) and (2.) pertain to the pleasing nature and acceptance of Christ's obedience offered on our behalf to God, rather than his atonement for our sin. (3.) The life yielded is man's duty to God, and man here is seen perfectly giving it. (4.) It fulfills the first commandment of love for God with all thy heart, all thy soul and all they mind.
The 3 varieties or grades of the offering pertain to the worshippers apprehension of Christ and differ in (1.) The animal offered as it relates to man's duties of labor (bullock), submission (lamb), and innocence (turtle-dove). (2.) The division of the animal into parts (bullock and lamb) shows appreciation for numerous qualities of Christ's obedience vs killed by ringing/tearing but not divided (turtle-dove) show a generalized view of Christ's obedience. (3.) Hands are laid on the animal (bullock) showing identification with Christ's sacrifice vs no hands laid on (lamb and turtle-dove) objectively observing Christ's sacrifice. (4.) The worshipper kills the animal (bullock and lamb) sets Christ before us in His person vs the Priest kills it (turtle-dove) represents Him in His official character as appointed Mediator between man and God.
I add (5.) Everything burnt as clean after washing w/ water/word (bullock and lamb) vs discard a portion as unfit for burning shows a weak conscience.
Ezekiel 17
3 And say, Thus saith the Lord God; A great eagle with great wings, longwinged, full of feathers, which had divers colours, came unto Lebanon, and took the highest branch of the cedar:
Job 39:13
Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks? or wings and feathers unto the ostrich?
These associations with the words "crop" and "feathers" in other passages lead me to believe the "glory" of the birds was removed and cast aside before the bird was burnt as an offering.
To draw an application, before Christians can offer their bodies an acceptable sacrifice to God their own "glory" must be discarded.
Romans 12:1
I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
Psalm 51:17
The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.
And he shall pluck away his crop with his feathers, and cast it beside the altar on the east part, by the place of the ashes:
First of all I wasn't sure what a "crop" was, so I googled it and found this definition on Wikipedia:
"A crop (sometimes also called a croup or a craw, ingluvies, or sublingual pouch) is a thin-walled expanded portion of the alimentary tract used for the storage of food prior to digestion. This anatomical structure is found in a wide variety of animals. It has been found in birds, and in invertebrate animals including gastropods (snails and slugs), earthworms, leeches, and insects.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers says:
"His crop with his feathers.-Just as in the case of quadrupeds the skin was flayed off the victim before it was put on the altar fire, so the feathers were removed from the bird before its body was placed on the altar. This is the natural sense which is to be expected from the context, since it can hardly be imagined that the victims would be burnt with the feathers, and thus cause an intolerable smell. The rendering, however, given in the margin, "with the filth thereof," is now adopted by the greater number of expositors. As the two words filth and feathers resemble each other in Hebrew, it is probable that one of them has dropped out of the text. The maw, therefore, with its contents, as well as the feathers, were removed to the eastern side of the altar, where the ashes from the altar were thrown ( Leviticus 6:3)."
Barnes' Notes on the Bible is typical of those that go with the marginal reading:
"His crop with his feathers - The weight of authority is in favor of the marginal rendering. It is most probable that the feathers were burned with the body, and that the wings, mentioned in Leviticus 1:17, were not mutilated."
Unlike larger animals, many commentators say the small size of the offering limited what the priest could do to make these parts acceptable for the alter, so they were cast away
This comment thread is locked. Please enter a new comment below to start a new comment thread.
Note: Comment threads older than 2 months are automatically locked.
Do you have a Bible comment or question?
Please Sign In or Register to post comments...
Report Comment
Which best represents the problem with the comment?