Leviticus22:17–33

The blemished victim and the disqualified priest verbal / quotation — confirmed

The defects that bar the animal in v.22 — blindness (‘ivvârôwn), the festering rash (gârâb), the scab (yallepheth) — are the same defects that bar the priest from the altar in Leviticus 21:18–20. Ellicott and Cambridge both note the deliberate correspondence; the Verifier records the rare shared lexemes that make it verbal rather than merely thematic. One holiness governs both who offers and what is offered.

Leviticus 21:18 · Leviticus 21:20

basis: rare shared Strong's lexemes between Lev 22:22 and Lev 21:20: H3217 yallepheth (in 2 vv), H1618 gârâb (in 3 vv); with Lev 21:18 sharing H5788 ʻivvârôwn (in 3 vv) and H3971 mʼûwm (in 19 vv) — low-frequency cultic vocabulary, not chance overlap.

Vow and freewill offering — the parent statute (Lev 7:16; Num 15:3) structural / thematic — confirmed

The two voluntary classes of v.18 and v.21 — the vow (neder) and the freewill offering (nᵉdâbâh) — are governed by the parent law of Leviticus 7:16, which both Keil & Delitzsch and Matthew Poole cite by name, and the offering-quantity rule of Numbers 15:3. The connection is real but rests on the recurring vow/freewill pair (nᵉdâbâh, 25 vv; neder, 57 vv) — the standing formulaic vocabulary of the whole sacrificial code rather than a rare, pointed quotation — so the badge is honestly tiered structural, not verbal: this is the legislation cross-referencing its own settled diction.

Leviticus 7:16 · Numbers 15:3

basis: shared lexemes Lev 22:21 ↔ Lev 7:16: H5071 nᵉdâbâh (in 25 vv), H5088 neder (in 57 vv), H2077 zebach (153 vv); Num 15:3 shares H5930 ʻôlâh (261 vv), H5088 neder, H5071 nᵉdâbâh. The rarest of these (nᵉdâbâh, 25 vv) is recurring formulaic offering-vocabulary, not a low-frequency hapax — a deliberate intra-code cross-reference, but a shared-motif/shared-formula link, not a rare verbal quotation. Downgraded from the verifier's default 'verbal' tier on that ground.

The disfigured offering — mishchâth (Lev 22:25 ↔ Isa 52:14) verbal / quotation — confirmed

The reason given for rejecting the foreigner's animal — מָשְׁחָתָם (mishchâth, H4893), "their disfigurement is in them" — uses one of the rarest nouns in Scripture, occurring in only two verses. Its sole other home is Isaiah 52:14, where the Servant's appearance was "so disfigured" beyond any man's. The same word that disqualifies a marred victim in Leviticus describes the marred Servant who would become the accepted offering. This is a genuine verbal link within the Hebrew canon; the typological weight, however, belongs to the Christ section below and is offered as a reading, not a quotation.

Isaiah 52:14

basis: rare shared lexeme H4893 mishchâth (in only 2 vv) — Lev 22:25 and Isa 52:14 are its sole occurrences; the verbal link is certain, the figural application is interpretive.

Offer the lame and the blind? — Malachi's indictment structural / thematic — confirmed

Centuries on, Malachi arraigns a careless priesthood for offering precisely what Leviticus 22 forbids: "When ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and when ye offer the lame and sick..." (Mal 1:8). Benson, JFB, Gill and Cambridge all cite Malachi as the prophetic application of this law. Because the link rests on shared cultic vocabulary and the recurring blemish-motif rather than a rare quotation, it is recorded as structural/thematic.

Malachi 1:8

basis: shared lexemes Lev 22:22 ↔ Mal 1:8: H176 ʼôw (in 218 vv), H7126 qârab (in 260 vv) — common cultic words; the connection is the shared blemished-offering motif, repeatedly cited by the PD commentators, not a rare verbal quotation.

The same law restated — Deuteronomy's blemish ban structural / thematic — confirmed

Deuteronomy 17:1 restates this very statute in the second giving of the law: "You shall not sacrifice to the LORD your God an ox or a sheep in which is a blemish... for that is an abomination to the LORD." It turns on the same keyword מוּם (mûm, H3971) that governs Leviticus 22:20–25, and pairs it with the same herd/flock animals. The shared vocabulary is the offering-code's standing diction rather than a rare lexeme, so the tie is honestly tiered structural/thematic — the Deuteronomic restatement of the unblemished-victim principle, not a quotation of it.

Deuteronomy 17:1

basis: shared lexeme Lev 22:20 ↔ Deut 17:1: H3971 mʼûwm (in 19 vv) — the unit's keyword for the disqualifying blemish; the rest of the overlap is high-frequency (H3588 kîy, H3808 lôʼ). Deuteronomy restates the same law with the same controlling word, a structural/legal parallel rather than a rare verbal quotation.

A lamb without blemish — the unblemished victim (1 Pet 1:19; Heb 9:14) ancient/widely-held

The demand for a tâmîym, an unblemished victim (vv.19, 21), is read across the church's history as a type of Christ, "a lamb without blemish and without spot" (1 Pet 1:19), who "through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God" (Heb 9:14). The reading is not a modern overlay: the Pulpit Commentary states it as the first purpose of the whole law — the perfect animals are "types of a future perfect Victim" — and Jamieson, Fausset & Brown make the same typology explicit on v.23, that the perfection required "led them typically to Him without whom no sacrifice could be offered acceptable to God." This is a cross-Testament reading: there is no shared Hebrew/Greek lexeme — the New Testament's amōmos is not a translation of tâmîym here — so the link is typological, not verbal.

1 Peter 1:19 · Hebrews 9:14 · Leviticus 22:19

The disfigured Servant who is the accepted offering (Isa 52:14; 53:10) novel

Leviticus rejects the offering whose mishchâth (disfigurement) is in it (v.25); Isaiah says the Servant's appearance was disfigured — the same rare Hebrew word — beyond any man (Isa 52:14), yet "it pleased the LORD" to make his soul "an offering" (Isa 53:10). The novel, but textually-anchored, reading: the one whose marring would have disqualified an ordinary victim is precisely the one whose marring God accepts, because he bears the disfigurement of the flawed offerers. The verbal hook (mishchâth) is real and rare; the Christological turn is a reading offered to be tested.

Isaiah 52:14 · Isaiah 53:10 · Leviticus 22:25

Eighth-day maturity and the offering 'at man's estate' novel

Gill (1746–63) draws the type directly from the eighth-day rule of v.27: "Christ, the type of all the sacrifices, was not to be offered, or suffer death in his infancy, which Herod contrived, but at man's estate." The week of completed creation must pass before the creature is fit to be given — and the perfect Sacrifice came to his offering not as an infant but in the fullness of a matured life. A patristic-flavored reading, here carried by Gill; offered as figural, not as the verse's plain sense.

Leviticus 22:27 · Galatians 4:4