Leviticus 17:3 - Coke's Commentary on the Holy Bible

What man soever there be of the house of Israel, &c.— This law forbids any beast to be slain for domestic use, unless the blood be poured or sprinkled upon the altar; lest, if they should be slain out of the camp, and the blood poured on the ground, it should give room for idolatry, the Gentiles often sacrificing to their gods after this manner: therefore this law was only temporary; neither did it oblige the children of Israel any longer than while they were travelling through the desart; for being newly come out of Egypt, they had hardly put off the idolatrous customs which they had imbibed there. This is the opinion of the judicious Spencer, and Dr. Cudworth also is of the same mind: "for all the while," says he, (in his Treatise on the Sacrament) "the Jews were in the wilderness, they were to eat no meat at all at their private tables, but that whereof they had first sacrificed to God at the tabernacle; which command was afterwards dispensed with when they came into the land, and their dwellings were become remote from their tabernacle." See Deuteronomy 12:20-21. Instead whereof, Houbigant observes, three set times in the year were appointed for all the males to come and sacrifice. Among other reasons, Houbigant remarks, that the words blood shall be imputed unto that man, he hath shed blood, (Leviticus 17:4.) prove the interpretation given. For the law would not condemn him as guilty of shedding blood who should slay an animal designed for God: but if they, who slew an animal without the tabernacle, were desirous to sacrifice to strange gods, they were guilty of idolatry, and not of shedding blood only. Therefore the law does not provide that the children of Israel should slay at the door of the tabernacle the animals designed to be offered to God, but that no animals at all, of the kinds immediately mentioned, should be slain in any other place; at the same time appointing, that their fat should be burnt upon the altar, lest they should be offered to false gods if it was allowed to slay the animals in any other place than under the inspection of the priests. And the law itself plainly discovers its own design, thus directing in the 7th verse, they shall no more offer their sacrifices unto devils. The intention of the lawgiver is the best rule to discover the spirit of the law; but we see plainly that the intention of the lawgiver was here to prevent the Israelites from the worship of devils. This law concerned the Israelites only while they dwelt in camps; necessity abrogated it when they inhabited cities. In this view the penalty of death, enjoined for this offence, Leviticus 17:4 is obviously most just and reasonable, as well as agreeable to the whole tenor of the law against idolatry; and consequently their observation is of no use, who would read, the blood (i.e. of the animal) shall be counted to that man, he having shed it: as if the man was not to be adjudged as a murderer, but only as a transgressor of the law.