“‘No lay person ¹  may eat anything holy. Neither a priest’s lodger ²  nor a hired laborer may eat anything holy,

biblegateway Lev 22:10

‘No layman, however, is to eat the holy gift; a sojourner with the priest or a hired man shall not eat of the holy gift.

"No one outside a priest's family is to eat the holy offering. A foreigner staying with a priest or a hired hand is not to eat the holy offering.

"Laypeople must never eat any holy offering, even if they are visiting a priest or are working for him.

biblegateway Lev 22:10

"‘No-one outside a priest’s family may eat the sacred offering, nor may the guest of a priest or his hired worker eat it.

"A lay person shall not eat of a holy thing; no foreign guest of the priest or hired servant shall eat of a holy thing,

bibleoremus Lev 22:10

No lay person shall eat of the sacred donations. No bound or hired servant of the priest shall eat of the sacred donations;

No lay person may eat a holy-gift; neither a stranger who is a priest's guest nor a priest's hired man may eat it.

biblegateway Lev 22:10

‘No outsider shall eat the holy offering ; one who dwells with the priest, or a hired servant, shall not eat the holy thing.

There shall no stranger eat [of] the holy thing: a sojourner of the priest, or an hired servant, shall not eat [of] the holy thing.

biblegateway Lev 22:10

“‘No lay person ¹  may eat anything holy. Neither a priest’s lodger ²  nor a hired laborer may eat anything holy,

¹ tn Heb “No stranger” (so KJV, ASV), which refers here to anyone other than the Aaronic priests. Some English versions reverse the negation and state positively: NIV “No one outside a priest’s family”; NRSV “Only a member of a priestly family”; CEV “Only you priests and your families.”

² tn Heb “A resident [תּוֹשָׁב (toshav) from יָשַׁב (yashav, “to dwell, to reside”)] of a priest.” The meaning of the term is uncertain. It could refer to a “guest” (NIV) or perhaps “bound servant” (NRSV; see B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 149). In the translation “lodger” was used instead of “boarder” precisely because a boarder would be provided meals with his lodging, the very issue at stake here.