LEVITICUS 4:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any (echad) of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and shall do against any of them:
The first part of the statement within this verse could have reasonably been translated as "If a soul sin through ignorance against one (echad) of the commandments of the LORD..." In such cases, translating the word "echad" into English as "any" instead of "one" makes the phrase more encompassing. Nevertheless, the original Hebrew word is "echad," which means "one."
In English, the word "one" is sometimes used as a pronoun, and has a numerical function. (For example: "Give this socket to one of the mechanics.") In Hebrew, the word "echad" is sometimes used in the same way: as a pronoun with a numerical function. Does this verse speak of transgressing a "unified" commandment, or does it speak of transgressing any single commandment of the LORD? Here, the pronoun "echad" indicates a quantity of broken commandments, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 1, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 4:13 ¶ And if the whole congregation of Israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done somewhat against any (echad) of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which should not be done, and are guilty;
The third clause within this verse could have reasonably been translated as "and they have done somewhat against one (echad) of the commandments of the LORD..." In such cases, translating the word "echad" into English, as "any" instead of "one" makes the phrase more encompassing. Nevertheless, the original Hebrew word is "echad," which means "one."
In English, the word "one" is sometimes used as a pronoun, and has a numerical function. (For example: "Give these taco shells to one of the cooks.") In Hebrew, the word "echad" is sometimes used in the same way: as a pronoun with a numerical function. Does this verse speak of transgressing a "unified" commandment, or does it speak of transgressing any single commandment of the LORD? Here, the pronoun "echad" indicates a quantity of broken commandments, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 2, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 4:22 ¶ When a ruler hath sinned, and done somewhat through ignorance against any (echad) of the commandments of the LORD his God concerning things which should not be done, and is guilty;
The third clause of this verse could have reasonably been translated as "against one (echad) of the commandments of the LORD..." In such cases, translating the word "echad" into English, as "any" instead of "one" makes the phrase more encompassing. Nevertheless, the original Hebrew word is "echad," which means "one."
In English, the word "one" is sometimes used as a pronoun, and has a numerical function. (For example: "He was fired for stealing one of the documents.") In Hebrew, the word "echad" is sometimes used in the same way: as a pronoun with a numerical function. Does this verse speak of transgressing a "unified" commandment, or does it speak of transgressing any single commandment of the LORD? Here, the pronoun "echad" indicates a quantity of broken commandments, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 3, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 4:27 ¶ And if any one of the common people sin through ignorance, while he doeth somewhat against any (echad) of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and be guilty;
The second clause within this verse could have reasonably been translated as "...while he doeth somewhat against one (echad) of the commandments of the LORD..." In such cases, translating the word "echad" into English, as "any" instead of "one" makes the phrase more encompassing. Nevertheless, the original Hebrew word is "echad," which means "one."
In English, the word "one" is sometimes used as a pronoun, and has a numerical function. (For example: "He was fined for breaking one of the traffic laws.") In Hebrew, the word "echad" is sometimes used in the same way: as a pronoun with a numerical function. Does this verse speak of transgressing a "unified" commandment, or does it speak of transgressing any single commandment of the LORD? Here, the pronoun "echad" indicates a quantity of broken commandments, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 4, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 5:4 Or if a soul swear, pronouncing with his lips to do evil, or to do good, whatsoever it be that a man shall pronounce with an oath, and it be hid from him; when he knoweth of it, then he shall be guilty in one (echad) of these.
Does the phrase "one of these" indicate a unification of something, or does "one of these" indicate a particular situation from a group of situations? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 5, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 5:5 And it shall be, when he shall be guilty in one (echad) of these things, that he shall confess that he hath sinned in that thing:
Does the phrase "one of these" indicate a unification of things, or does "one of these" indicate a particular situation from a group of situations? At the end of this verse, the phrase "he shall confess that he hath sinned in that thing" makes it plain that a particular thing is being spoken of. And so, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 6, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 5:7 And if he be not able to bring a lamb, then he shall bring for his trespass, which he hath committed, two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, unto the LORD; one (echad) for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering.
This is the first of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 5:7. Is a "unified" pigeon offered for the sin offering, or a single pigeon (one of the two pigeons that are offered)? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 7, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 5:7 And if he be not able to bring a lamb, then he shall bring for his trespass, which he hath committed, two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, unto the LORD; one for a sin offering, and the other (echad) for a burnt offering.
This is the second of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 5:7. Is this a "unified" pigeon that is offered for the burnt offering, or is it a single pigeon (the other pigeon of the two pigeons that are offered)? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 8, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 5:13 And the priest shall make an atonement for him as touching his sin that he hath sinned in one (echad) of these, and it shall be forgiven him: and the remnant shall be the priest's, as a meat offering.
Does the phrase "one of these" indicate a unification of something, or does "one of these" indicate a particular situation from a group of situations? This is consistent with the way "echad" is used during the entire course of the ordinance of the sin offering (Leviticus 5:1-13). Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 9, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 5:17 ¶ And if a soul sin, and commit any (echad) of these things which are forbidden to be done by the commandments of the LORD; though he wist it not, yet is he guilty, and shall bear his iniquity.
The second clause of this verse could have reasonably been translated as "and commit one (echad) of these things which are forbidden..." In such cases, translating the word "echad" into English, as "any" instead of "one" makes the phrase more encompassing. Nevertheless, the original Hebrew word is "echad," which means "one."
In English, the word "one" is sometimes used as a pronoun, and has a numerical function. (For example: "He was fired for stealing one of the documents.") In Hebrew, the word "echad" is sometimes used in the same way: as a pronoun with a numerical function. Does this verse speak of committing a "unified" forbidden act, or does it speak of committing one or more transgressions? Here, the word "echad" indicates a variety (a quantity) of transgressions, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 10, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 6:3 Or have found that which was lost, and lieth concerning it, and sweareth falsely; in any (echad) of all these that a man doeth, sinning therein:
The second part of the statement within this verse could have reasonably been translated as "in one (echad) of these things that a man doeth..." In such cases, translating the word "echad" into English, as "any" instead of "one" makes the phrase more encompassing (in English). Nevertheless, the original Hebrew word is "echad," which means "one."
In English, the word "one" is sometimes used as a pronoun, and has a numerical function. (For example: "Give this socket to one of the mechanics.") In Hebrew, the word "echad" is sometimes used in the same way: as a pronoun with a numerical function. Does this verse speak of committing a "unified" sin, or does it speak of committing any single sin? Here, the word "echad" indicates a variety (a quantity) of sins, not a union of sins.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 11, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 6:7 And the priest shall make an atonement for him before the LORD: and it shall be forgiven him for any (echad) thing of all that he hath done in trespassing therein.
The second part of the statement within this verse could have reasonably been translated as "it shall be forgiven him for one (echad) thing of all that he hath done..." In such cases, translating the word "echad" into English, as "any" instead of "one" makes the phrase more encompassing (in English). Nevertheless, the original Hebrew word is "echad," which means "one."
In English, the word "one" is sometimes used as a pronoun, and has a numerical function. (For example: "Sell this grain to one of the merchants.") In Hebrew, the word "echad" is sometimes used in the same way: as a pronoun with a numerical function. Does this verse speak of committing a "unified" transgression, or does it speak of committing any single transgression? Here, the word "echad" indicates a variety (a quantity) of transgressions, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 12, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 7:7 As the sin offering is, so is the trespass offering: there is one (echad) law for them: the priest that maketh atonement therewith shall have it.
This directly addresses the sin offering and the trespass offering. Specifically, it addresses who is to possess the remains of the animal that is offered. Is this part of the sin offering "unified" with the corresponding part of the trespass offering, or are the parts of these two offerings the same. Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity of laws, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 13, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 7:14 And of it he shall offer one (echad) out of the whole oblation for an heave offering unto the LORD, and it shall be the priest's that sprinkleth the blood of the peace offerings.
There were several different cakes and loaves to be offered (see Leviticus 7:11-13). Of these, a single unleavened cake was offered as a heave offering—not a "unified" cake. Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity of cakes, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 14, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 8:26 And out of the basket of unleavened bread, that was before the LORD, he took one (echad) unleavened cake, and a cake of oiled bread, and one wafer, and put them on the fat, and upon the right shoulder:
This is the first of three instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 8:26. Was this a "unified" unleavened cake that was taken from the basket, or a single unleavened cake? Here, the word "echad" plainly indicates a quantity of unleavened cakes, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 15, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 8:26 And out of the basket of unleavened bread, that was before the LORD, he took one unleavened cake, and a (echad) cake of oiled bread, and one wafer, and put them on the fat, and upon the right shoulder:
This is the second of three instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 8:26. (It may be difficult to see here, but the Hebrew word "echad" was translated into English as the word "a"). Was this a "unified" cake of oiled bread that was taken, or a single cake of oiled bread? Here, the word "echad" specifies a quantity of cakes, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 16, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 8:26 And out of the basket of unleavened bread, that was before the LORD, he took one unleavened cake, and a cake of oiled bread, and one (echad) wafer, and put them on the fat, and upon the right shoulder:
This is the third of three instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 8:26. Was this a "unified" wafer, or a single wafer, that was placed on the fat and right shoulder? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity of wafers, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 17, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 12:8 And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one (echad) for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean.
This is the first of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 12:8. Was a "unified" turtle or young pigeon used for the burnt offering, or was a single one (of the two) that was offered? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 18, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 12:8 And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other (echad) for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean.
This is the second of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 12:8. Was a "unified" turtle or young pigeon used for the sin offering, or was a single one (of the two) offered? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 19, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 13:2 When a man shall have in the skin of his flesh a rising, a scab, or a bright spot, and it be in the skin of his flesh like the plague of leprosy; then he shall be brought unto Aaron the priest, or unto one (echad) of his sons the priests:
In English, the word "one" is sometimes used as a pronoun, and has a numerical function. (For example: "One of the bolts is loose.") In Hebrew, the word "echad" is sometimes used in the same way: as a pronoun with a numerical function. In this verse, shall such a man be brought to a "united" son of Aaron, or to a single son of Aaron? Here, the pronoun "echad" indicates a quantity of priests, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 20, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 14:5 And the priest shall command that one (echad) of the birds be killed in an earthen vessel over running water:
Two birds are to be gathered for this sacrifice (Leviticus 14:4). With this in mind, does this verse say that a "unified" bird is to be killed, or that a single bird is to be killed? (Leviticus 14:6 tells what to do with the other bird.) Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity of birds, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 21, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 14:10 And on the eighth day he shall take two he lambs without blemish, and one (echad) ewe lamb of the first year without blemish, and three tenth deals of fine flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, and one log of oil.
Does this refer to a "unified" ewe lamb, or to a single ewe lamb? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity of ewe lambs, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 22, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 14:10 And on the eighth day he shall take two he lambs without blemish, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish, and three tenth deals of fine flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, and one (echad) log of oil.
Does this refer to a "unified" log of oil, or to a single log of oil? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity (of logs) of oil, not to "unified" oil.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 23, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 14:12 And the priest shall take one (echad) he lamb, and offer him for a trespass offering, and the log of oil, and wave them for a wave offering before the LORD:
Does this refer to a "unified" he lamb, or to a single he lamb? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity of he lambs, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 24, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 14:21 And if he be poor, and cannot get so much; then he shall take one (echad) lamb for a trespass offering to be waved, to make an atonement for him, and one tenth deal of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering, and a log of oil;
This is the first of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 14:21. Does this refer to a "unified" lamb for a trespass offering, or to a single lamb? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity of lambs, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 25, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 14:21 And if he be poor, and cannot get so much; then he shall take one lamb for a trespass offering to be waved, to make an atonement for him, and one (echad) tenth deal of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering, and a log of oil;
This is the second of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 14:21. Does this really refer to a "unified" tenth deal of flour, or to a single tenth deal of flour? Here, the word "echad" is used to indicate a quantity (of tenth deals) of flour, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 26, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 14:22 And two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, such as he is able to get; and the one (echad) shall be a sin offering, and the other a burnt offering.
This is the first of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 14:22. Does this refer to a "unified" pigeon, or to a single pigeon for the sin offering? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a unification.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 27, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 14:22 And two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, such as he is able to get; and the one shall be a sin offering, and the other (echad) a burnt offering.
This is the second of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 14:22. Does this refer to a "unified" pigeon, or to a single pigeon for the burnt offering? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a unification.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 28, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 14:30 And he shall offer the one (echad) of the turtledoves, or of the young pigeons, such as he can get;
Leviticus 14:21-22 includes the list of animals necessary for this sacrifice: one lamb, and two turtledoves, or young pigeons. The next verse after this one, (Leviticus 14:31, see the following two examples below), lists these two birds as "one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering." This verse, therefore, indicates a quantity of birds to be offered for the sin offering, and says nothing about a "unified" bird.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 29, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 14:31 Even such as he is able to get, the one (echad) for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering, with the meat offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for him that is to be cleansed before the LORD.
This is the first of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 14:31. Leviticus 14:22 specifies that two birds are to be used for this atonement. Is this a "unified" bird, or a single bird that is to be used for the sin offering? (The other bird is for the burnt offering.) Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity of birds, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 30, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 14:31 Even such as he is able to get, the one for a sin offering, and the other (echad) for a burnt offering, with the meat offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for him that is to be cleansed before the LORD.
This is the second of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 14:31. Leviticus 14:22 specifies that two birds are to be used for this atonement. Is a "unified" bird, or a single bird that is to be used for the burnt offering? (The other bird is for the sin offering.) Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity of birds, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 31, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 14:50 And he shall kill the one (echad) of the birds in an earthen vessel over running water:
Leviticus 14:49 shows that God is talking about two birds here. This verse says that one of the two birds is to be killed, and the next verse (Leviticus 14:51) tells what to do with the other bird. In this verse (verse 50), the word "echad" is used to indicate a quantity, not a union of birds.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 32, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 15:15 And the priest shall offer them, the one (echad) for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for him before the LORD for his issue.
This is the first of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 15:15. Is this a "unified" turtledove (or young pigeon), or is this a single bird that is to be offered for the sin offering? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 33, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 15:15 And the priest shall offer them, the one for a sin offering, and the other (echad) for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for him before the LORD for his issue.
This is the second of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 15:15. Is this a "unified" turtledove (or young pigeon), or is this a single bird that is to be offered for the burnt offering? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 34, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 15:30 And the priest shall offer the one (echad) for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for her before the LORD for the issue of her uncleanness.
This is the first of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 15:30. The birds specified for this verse (at Leviticus 15:29) are "two turtles, or two young pigeons." A "turtle" is short for a "turtledove" (see the example for Leviticus 14:15, above). Now, is this a "unified" bird, or is it a single bird of the two birds that is to be offered for the sin offering? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 35, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 15:30 And the priest shall offer the one for a sin offering, and the other (echad) for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for her before the LORD for the issue of her uncleanness.
This is the second of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 15:30. The birds specified for this verse (at Leviticus 15:29) are "two turtles, or two young pigeons." A "turtle" is short for a "turtledove" (see the example for Leviticus 14:15, above). Now, is this a "unified" bird, or is it a single bird of the two birds that is to be offered for the burnt offering? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 36, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 16:5 And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats for a sin offering, and one (echad) ram for a burnt offering.
Is this a "unified" ram for a burnt offering, or is it a single ram for a burnt offering? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity of rams, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 37, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 16:8 And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one (echad) lot for the LORD, and the other lot for the scapegoat.
This is the first of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 16:8. Is this a "unified" goat, or a single goat for the LORD? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union of goats.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 38, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 16:8 And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the other (echad) lot for the scapegoat.
This is the second of two instances of the word "echad" in Leviticus 16:8. Was the scapegoat a "unified" goat, or was it a single goat? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity of goats, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 39, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 22:28 And whether it be cow or ewe, ye shall not kill it and her young both in one (echad) day.
Is the concern here that the mother and the young animal not be killed on a "unified" day, or is it that they're not both killed on the same day? Here, the word "echad" refers to a quantity of days, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 40, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 23:18 And ye shall offer with the bread seven lambs without blemish of the first year, and one (echad) young bullock, and two rams: they shall be for a burnt offering unto the LORD, with their meat offering, and their drink offerings, even an offering made by fire, of sweet savour unto the LORD.
Is a young "unified" bullock to be offered with two rams, or a single young bullock? Here, the word "echad" plainly indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 41, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 23:19 Then ye shall sacrifice one (echad) kid of the goats for a sin offering, and two lambs of the first year for a sacrifice of peace offerings.
Is a "unified" kid of the goats to be offered for a sin offering, or a single kid? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 42, as an ordinal: 0
LEVITICUS 23:24 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, In the seventh month, in the first (echad) day of the month, shall ye have a sabbath, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation.
This indicates which position this day occupies from within a sequence of days. Here, the word "echad" is an ordinal, and indicates neither a union nor a quantity.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 42, as an ordinal: 1
LEVITICUS 24:5 ¶ And thou shalt take fine flour, and bake twelve cakes thereof: two tenth deals shall be in one (echad) cake.
Is this the recipe for a "unified" cake, or is it a pattern for each of the twelve cakes? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 43, as an ordinal: 1
LEVITICUS 24:22 Ye shall have one (echad) manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: for I am the LORD your God.
This is the first of two occurrences of the word "echad" in Leviticus: 24:22. Is this a "unified" manner of law for the stranger and the Israelite, or is this the same manner of law for the two? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 44, as an ordinal: 1
LEVITICUS 24:22 Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one (echad) of your own country: for I am the LORD your God.
This is the second of two occurrences of the word "echad" in Leviticus 24:22. In English, the word "one" is sometimes used as a pronoun, and has a numerical function. (For example: "I have a cookie for one of them.") In Hebrew, the word "echad" is sometimes used in the same way: as a pronoun with a numerical function. Is this law the same for both the stranger and a "unified" Israelite, or is it the same law for the stranger and any particular Israelite. Here, the pronoun "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 45, as an ordinal: 1
LEVITICUS 25:48 After that he is sold he may be redeemed again; one (echad) of his brethren may redeem him:
In English, the word "one" is sometimes used as a pronoun, and has a numerical function. (For example: "The clock adorned one of the walls.") In Hebrew, the word "echad" is sometimes used in the same way: as a pronoun with a numerical function. In this verse, could such a man be redeemed by a "unified" brother, or by any particular family member? Here, the pronoun "echad" indicates a quantity, not a union of relatives.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 46, as an ordinal: 1
LEVITICUS 26:26 And when I have broken the staff of your bread, ten women shall bake your bread in one (echad) oven, and they shall deliver you your bread again by weight: and ye shall eat, and not be satisfied.
Grammatically speaking, are ten women to bake in a "unified" oven, or in a single oven? Here, the word "echad" indicates a quantity of ovens, not a union.
Subtotal for Leviticus: Echad as a union: 0, as a quantity: 47, as an ordinal: 1
Running total of the uses of the Hebrew word "echad" in the book of Leviticus: The word "echad" was used as a union of several nouns on no occasions, as a quantity of nouns on 47 occasions, and was used to indicate an ordinal position on 1 occasion.
When these sums are added those of books previous to Leviticus, we get the following sums:
| as a Union |
as a Quantity |
as an Ordinal |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Genesis | 1 | 40 | 5 |
| Exodus | 2 | 81 | 11 |
| Leviticus | 0 | 47 | 1 |
| Numbers | - | - | - |
| Deuteronomy | - | - | - |
| Total (thus far): | 3 | 168 | 17 |