Leviticus 21:16

"And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron saying, Whosoever he be of thy seed throughout their generations that hath a blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or anything superfluous, or a man that is broken-footed, or broken-handed, or crook-backed, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or is scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; no man of the seed of Aaron the priest, that hath a blemish, shall come nigh to offer the offerings of Jehovah made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God. He shall eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy: only he shall not go in unto the veil, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries: for I am Jehovah who sanctifieth them. So Moses spake unto Aaron, and to his sons, and unto all the children of Israel."

"Whosoever hath a blemish ..." (Leviticus 21:17). This was the blanket rule; the specifics follow. Some of the specifics are of uncertain meaning.

"He that hath a flat nose ..." (Leviticus 21:18) The RSV renders this, "a split or mutilated face."

"Anything superfluous ..." (Leviticus 21:18) Allis noted that, "Six fingers instead of five"[14] would have been such a blemish.

"Crook-backed and dwarf ..." (Leviticus 21:20). "These may be incorrect translations. The term may relate to the eyebrows or to the eyes."[15] (See the New English Bible.)

"He shall eat the bread of his God ..." (Leviticus 21:22). Despite the inability of such blemished persons to serve at the highest level of service in God's worship, they nevertheless were not denied any of the privileges of the priesthood as regards their living. There were also doubtless many things they could do which did not involve going near the veil or the altar. For example, they might have been used to inspect lepers or perform other tasks. Clements called this provision "a divinely sponsored insurance policy in operation!"[16]

Lofthouse pointed out that certain pagan religious cults allowed all kinds of cuttings and mutilations (even castrations) to be practiced by their priests, especially in the worship of Cybele.[17] The true religion of God contrasted dramatically with pagan custom, no less in this matter than in every other. Lofthouse also noted that, "Aesthetic repulsion"[18] may have figured in God's requirements for unblemished priests to provide the ritual service in his holy religion. No matter how right intrinsically anything may be, there are some things which simply do not appear to be appropriate, and surely some of the prohibitions here fall into that category.