Sin-Offering for Sins of Inadvertency
BRETUREN, IP A MAN BE OVERTAKES* IN A FAULT, YK WHICH ARE SriRITt’AL RESTORE 8UCU AN ONE IN THE SPIRIT OF MEEKNESS.” — Qol. vL 3.
Ver. 1. “And if a soul sin, and bear the voice of swearing, and is r witness, wbetlier he hath seen or known of it; if he do not utter it, then he shall bear his iniquity”
The meaning is, “If a person sin in this respect,” viz., that he hear the oath of adjuration administered by the judge, and is able to tell, having either seen or otherwise known the matter about which he is to testify: if such a man d6 not tell all he knows, he shall be reckoned guilty of a sin.
‘* The voice of swearing’^ undoubtedly means here the adjuration of a judge to a prisoner. The term (nbx) employed here is the same as that used in 1 Sam. xiv. 24, “Saul had adjured (^>?) the people;” and in 1 Kings viii. 31, “If an adjuration be laid upon him, adjuring him to speak out the truth;” and Judges xvii. 2, “The eleven hundred shekels of silver that were taken from thee, about which thou didst adjure;” and Prov. xxix. 24, “He heareth an adjuration, and yet telleth not.” The judge, in a court of justice, was permitted to elicit
* “Overtaken,” ia fpoXiffOf, hurried into sin ere he is well aware, (Bretschneider.) “Fault,” is wafarrufta, transigrcssioa, sin.
“information from the witness by solemnly charging him to answer and tell all he knew, under penalty of a curse from God if he did not reveal the whole truth. It was in those circumstances that our Lord was placed before the High Priest. (Matt. xxvi. 63.) He was then, surely, in the depths of humiliation! For now he is called upon, under threatening of the curse of his own Father, to break that strange silence, and tell all he knows,” 1 adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.’’’’ And then it was that the Lamb of God no longer kept himself dumb; but,, bowing to the solemn force of this adjuration, showed the same meekness in replying as before he had done in keeping silence. From the depth of his humiliation he pointed upward to the throne, and declared himself Son of Grod, and judge of quick and dead.
The sins mentioned in this chapter are chiefly sins arising from negligence — sins which might have been / avoided, had th*e person been more careful.
The case of the mitness in ver. 1, is one where the person omitted to tell particulars which he could have told, or else, through carelessness, misstating some things. Let us learn the breadth of God’s holy law! Not a tittle fails. Let us learn the Holy Spirit’s keen observation of sin in us. Let us learn to be jealous over ourselves, and seek to be of “quick discernment, in the fear of the Lord.” Much sin is committed by omissions. Duties partially done have in them the guilt of Ananias and Sapphira.
Ver. 2. “Or if a soul touch any unclean tiling, whether it be a carcasa of an unclean beast, or a carcass of unclean cattle, or the carcass of unclean creeping things, and if it be hidden from him; he also shall be unclean, and guilty.”
9i SINS OF INADVERTENCY.
These, aa well as ver. 3, are cases where others could see the pollution, though the man himself might bo unaware of it at the time. They were, therefore, cases of a public injury in some degree. Through inadvertency a man might touch a carcass* of an unclean “beast’ (njn), the term used for the sort of animals most commonly met with in every-day work. These are noticed first, as it was most likely they would oftenest meet with them. Then” cattle” in the fields or forests. Lastly, “creeping things,” such as the weazel, the mouse, or the lizard (xi. 30). Thus there is a gradation, greater, middle, and smallest; as if to say to us, that any degree of pollution is offensive to a pure and holy God. A true Israelite ought to keep completely free from all that defiles, however trifling, in the eye of the world. Whatever sin God’s eye resteth on, that is the sin which the man of God abhors. The man after God’s own heart prays, “Cleanse thou me from secret faults.” (Psa. xix. 12.) And, in reference to its being “htdden’’’’ yet still chargeable upon the sinner, he exclaims, “Thou hast set our iniquities before thee, our secret sins in the light of thy countenance.” (Psa. xc. 8.)
Here, too, we learn that” sin is the transgression of the law.’’^ (1 John iii. 4.) It is not merely nhen we act contrary to the dictates of conscience that we sin; we may often be sinning when conscience never upbraids us. The most part of a sinner’s life is spent without any check on the part of conscience — that being dead and corrupt, fallen and depraved, responding to the man’s lusts, rather than to the will of God. Hence it is said
“Were dead bodiea reckoned unclean on Uie ground that they are the fruit of iin f The sting of detUh is, as it were, sunk into them; and so tin i« proved to be there.
here, that though” it be hidden from him,’’^ he shall be unclean. He is guilty, though his conscience did not warn him of the guilt contracted.
A wful truth! We know not what we do! When the Book is opened and read, what a record of unfelt guilt I “Had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory;” but yet their act was the blackest of sins. Who can tell what pages there may be in the Book of Remembrance ?*
Ver. 3. “Or if he touch the uncleanness of man, whatsoever Tindeanness it be that a man shall be defiled withal, and it be hid from him; when he knoweth of it, then he shall be guilty.”
This last clause is equivalent to “If it be hid from him, though he afterward come to know it.”” The uncleanness of a man,’’’’ is such as the leprosy, or a running issue caused.
Again the lesson is enforced, that unconscious as our depraved souls may be of the presence of sin, sin may have polluted us and separated between us and God. We are guarded against the deceitfulness of sin. We need to be told of sin by others. Our coming afterwards to know our sin, may often be by means of our brethren’s reproofs, and their quicker discernment of evil. Hence it is written, “Exhort one another daily, while it is called to-day, lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.” (Heb. iii. 13.)
Ver. 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 of these.”
Francis Quarles truly, though quaintly, says of a sin of ignorance, — “It is a hideous mist that wets amain. Though it appear not in the form of rain.”
More literally, “If a person swear, blabbing with his lips’’’ — rashly uttering his vow. The careless way o doing even what is right is here condemned. Incosiderateness is a heinous crime, for the man is appealin to God; and especially so when the thing vowed is evil. The case of man inadvertently swearing to do evil, is a case like Jephtha’s. Jephtha meant good, but it turned out to bo evil of a flagrant nature. The clause, “And it be hid from him,” is equivalent to “And did not rightly understand the thing about which he swore.” There is a solemn lesson taught us in regard to the mode of doing even right things. Approach the Holy One with fear and reverence. But alas I how plentiful is the flow of hidden sin -committed in our dedications to God, or in resolutions to be his, expressed to him in prayer and praise. Even in saying or writing “God willing” (d.v.) this secret sin may be oftentimes chargeable upon our unconscious souls!
“In one of these” i. e., any of the cases mentioned; the adjuration; touching the dead body, or other uncleanness; and rash vows.
Vers, 6, 6. “And it shall be, when lie shall be guilty in one of these things, that he shall confess that he hath sinned in that thing. And he shall bring his trespass-offering unto the Lord, for his sin which he hath sinned, a female from the flock, a lamb or a kid of the goat«, for a sin-offering; and the priest shall make on atooemeDt for him concerning his sin.”
The first thing that strikes us here as very noticeable, is the injunction, “He shall confess that he hath sinned.” Abarbinel, on the sixteenth chapter, says, that confession necessarily accompanied every sacrifice for sin. But we have not met this duty before in the express form of a command, because hitherto the sins brought to the altar were open and admitted sins.* But here the sins are “bidden;” and therefore the offerer must openly con- ‘«them, that so Grod may be honored — “That thou “ghtest’be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest.” (Psalm li. 4.) This is the end of confession; it vindicates God, proclaiming him just in the penalty he inflicts. We see this in Achmi’s case, when Joshua said, “My son, give, I pray thee, glory to the Lord God of Israel, and make confession unto him, and tell me now what thou hast done; hide it not from me.” (Josh. vii. 19.) It is thus that, when we truly confess, we become witnesses for God — we testify that we have come to see the sin and its evil which he declared that his pure eye saw. The original uses a word for confess, which in another form means to praise (ntrinn and nnin); and in the New Testament as well as the Old, the two acts are often reckoned the same. (See the use of iofioloyoifAai) The tribute to the holiness of the Lord, paid in confession, is praise to his name. We decrease; he increases:
“He shall bring his trespass-offering P Some suppose that there were on this occasion, first, lki& Irespassoffering, and then a sin-offering. But not so: it ought to be rendered, “He shall bring his offering,” the word fiirx being used not as a specific terra, but as a general term for any offering on account of sin. And it is thus that it is used by Isaiah (liii. 10), “When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin’’’ (iTrsscrij ci”’iJ3n).
* There is no doubt but that the laying on of the hand on the animal’s head involved confession of sin. So common was confession, that John the Baptist’s practice of insisting on confession of sin from all that came to his baptism, excited no opposition. They Mere thus naturally led to lay their eins on the “Coming One.”
The offering is to be “a female from the flock.” It ia a less glaring sin than some other, such as chap. iv. 1- 27, and therefore a female, and a young one, is taken. And either a female kid, or a female lamb, may be chosen; the object being to fix the offerer’s attention upon the blood shed for his sin, and not upon any quality in the victim, as might have been the result had only the lamb been allowed. His sin and its atonement is ail that must engage the offerer.
Ver. T. “And if he be not able to briti a lamb, tlicn he shall bring, for his trespass ‘which he hath committed, two turtle-doves, or two young pigeons, unto the Lord: one for a sin-offering, and the other for a burnt-offering.”
Here, again, we seethe God of Israel manifesting himself to be that very Saviour who “preached glad tidings to the poor.” The two doves are allowed for their sake.
But why two? Is this not equivalent to an intimation that one turtle-dove or pigeon would not represent the Saviour? Is this not attaching importance to the mere material of the sacrifice? The answer to these questions leads us to a very interesting view of the Lord’s tender regard to the feelings of the poor of .his people.
There is no importance attached to the mere number; for in chap. i. 15, there was only one turtle-dove sacrificed; and it was sufficient as a type, and equivalent to the one bullock or lamb.
But here and elsewhere, where ttD6 doves are offered, there is a special reason why two are chosen. The one is always for a sin-offering, and the other for a burnt-offering. Now, in the sin-offering, when it was a lamb or the like, there were portions left for the use of the priest, after the sacrifice was offered, and these portions, received and feasted on by the priest, were equivalent to a declaration of the complete removal of the sin, since the priest himself could thus fearlessly use them. But there was no room for this being done when a turtle-dove was offered. There were no portions for the priest to feast upon. Hence, in order that the poor worshipper might not lose this consoling part of the type, he is told to offer a second turtle-dove as a burnt-offering. And in this latter offering, the Lord himself directly receives all, and pronounces all to be “a sweet savor”, (chap. i. 17). So that the poor saint gets even a more hearty assurance of his offering being accepted, than does another who only gets this assurance by means of the priest’s receiving his portion to feast upon, and seeing the priest’s household feast thereon.
Ver. 8. “And he shall bring them unto the priest, who shall oflfer that which is for the sin-offering first, and wring off his head from his neck, but shall not divide it asunder: And he shall sprinkle of the blood of the sin-offering upon the side of the altar: and the rest of the blood shall be wrung out at the bottom of the altar.”
There is some difference in the ceremony observed here in slaying the turtle-dove from that of chap. i. 14. The head is to be wrung off, yet so as not to separate it from the body. It would hang down upon the lifeless body, the blood also dropping upon its white clean plumage. Was it meant to be a type of Jesus bowing his head as he gave up the ghost? His head, bleeding with the thorns that had crowned him, dropped upon his bosom as the sting of death entered his holy frame.
There may be a farther type. The Passover lamb, of which not a bone was broken, prefigured Jesus as one, “not a bone of whose body should be broken;” and yet, at the same time, it prefigured the complete keeping and safety of Christ’s body — the Church; as it is written ia Psalm xxxiv. 20, “He keepeth all his bones; not one of them is broken.” So also here; the bowing of the Saviour’s head seems prefigured — not too small a circumstance for an evangelist to record, and for the Father to remember regarding the well-beloved son — but there may also be herein a type of the glorious truth, that Christ and his body — the Church — ca.nnot be separated. The head and the body must be left undivided.
In chapter i. 15, there is no mention of the “sprinkling-of any of the- blood upon the altar.” But here some of it is first sprinkled on the side of the altar, then the rest wrung’ out at the bottom. The sprinkling on the altar’s side was quite sufficient to declare life taken; and as the second dove would have its blood wrung out over the side of the altar, there was a fitness in making this difference. At the same time, it shows us how sprinkling a part or pouring out the whole, express equally the same truth; just as in baptism the symbol is equally significant whether the water be sprinkled on the person or the person plunged into the water.
Ver. 10. “And he shall olTor the second for a burnt-offering, according to the manner: and the priest bboll make an atonement for him, for his sin which he hath Binnod, and it shall be forgiven him.”
“Thus shall the priest make an atonement for him [cleansing him] from the sin which ho hath sinned.”* The poor saint has full and ample testimony given to the completeness of his offering. The one great ocean — “Christ ONCE suffered” — “one sacrifice” (Heb. x. 12)
* This seem a to be the force of ipxuma here, and ver. 6. It is a con’ Btructio prcBgnant, as Id ver. 16, sa Ronmakes the bullock appear as insignificant as the turtle-dove. The waves of the sea cover every shallow pool!
Ver. 11. “But if he be not able to bring two turtle-doves, or two young pigeons, then he that sinned shall bring for his offering the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour, for a sin-ofifering: he shall put no oil upon it, neither shall he put any frankincense thereon, for it is a sin-offering.”
The Lord descends even to the poorest of all, those who had no lamb to spare. He provides for the Lazaruses of Israel, and the widows who have but two mites remaining, in the very spirit of love wherein Jesus spoke of them. It is Jesus that here, as Jehovah, arranges these types for the comfort of his afflicted people.
The burnt-offering was never allowed to be of any inanimate thing. For in that great type of the Saviour blood must flow. It must exhibit life taken, and, the sentence,” Thou shalt surely die,’’^ executed. The sacrifice which was the groundwork of all the rest must exhibit death. But this point being settled and established, any danger of misapprehension is removed. Whatever may afterwards be the varieties permitted in the forms of offering, yet at the threshold the necessity for the shedding of blood in order to remission must be declared and testified. (Heb. ix. 22.) But now there is here a permission granted — a permission which cannot be misunderstood, since its application is limited to this one particular class of persons, and for special reasons — a permission to bring an offering’ of fine flour, when the man is too poor to bring two turtle-doves or young pigeons. This meat-offering is expressly spoken of as not the strict and proper offering, but merely a substi.
tute for that better kind.* And, as remarked by Magee, the poor man would look forward to the day of atonement to complete what this was a substitute for. He is then to take a handful of the fine wheat of the land of his Israel. A few ears of the wheat of that land would furnish enough; and every Israelite had some family inheritance. An omer, or the tenth part of an cp/iah, is the quantity; just the very quantity of manna that sufficed for each day’s support. Probably the poor man, who needed to bring his offering for a sin committed, was thus taught to give up just his food for that day — fasting before the Lord.
As in the jealousy-offering, no oil or frank incence must be put upon it; for the very intention of- it is to present to the Lord the person and substance of the offerer (see chapter ii. 1) as altogether defiled — a mass of sin!
No doubt this new kind of sin-offering is intentionally permitted, in order to show some things that the animal sacrifice could not have shown forth. It exhibits not the soul only (that is taken for granted when the body and substance are devoted), but all that belongs to the person — his body and his property — as needing to be redeemed by sacrifice, since it has become polluted. All is forfeited — no frankincense of sweet savor on it, no oil of consecration.
Yen. 12, 18.” Then ehall be bring it to the priest, and the |N:iost shall take bis handful of it, even a memorial thereof, and burn it on the altar, accordiog to the offerings made by fire unto the Lord: it is a sin-offeriog. And the priest shall make an atonement for him, as
* Socinians m vain try to make a handle of this case; for if ever there ▼u an instance where it could be said, “Exctptio probat regvlam,” it is bore.
toucbing his sin that he hath sinned in one of these, and it shall be forgiven him: and the remnant shall be the priest’s, as a meat-offering.”
The memorial of this mass of sin is consumed in the fire of wrath; but the priest takes his portion, in order to show that the sin is cleansed out from the mass.
Shall it not be thus at the resurrection morning? The body now cleansed, and earth itself purged by fire? Then is man fully re’deemed; his soul, his body, his inheritance or possessions. No sin left to bring in a secret curse! no Gribeonite-blood lying hid in its bosom to bring on sudden and unthought-of woes. No Achantreasure in the tent-floor, provoking the eyes of the Lord’s glory.
In looking back on this chapter concerning sins of inadvertency, how awful is the view it presents of the Lord’s jealousy! “His eyes are as a flame of fire;” and he “judges not according to the hearing of the ear,” but according to the truth that remains untold. How great the provocation that his own saints give to him daily, by touching the unclean, and by other almost imperceptible movements of the heart towards evil. “Woe is me! I am undone! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell among a people of unclean lips!” In such cases we need to take for ourselves the counsel that Cain rejected when the Lord said, “If thou doest well (sinnest not) shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well (sinnest), a sin-oflering lieth at thy door” (nsttsn Y’y-), (Gren. iv. 7.) How ancient is the grace of God! How old is that gracious saying, “These things write I unto you that ye sin nx)t; and if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the propitiation for our sins.”
In these ancient days there was the same grace exhibited to the sinner as there is under the New Testament. God held out forgiveness, full and immediate, in order to allure the sinner, without delay, back to fellowship with himself. And as now, so then, many abused this grace. They used it not to cleanse their conscience, but to lull it asleep. Of these Solomon is supposed to complain,* in Prov. xiii. 6, *’ Wickedness perverleth the sin-offering,^^ nxan ^ioin. Nevertheless, the truth of Q-od stood sure; “righteousness preserved the perfect.”
* See Faber on Sacrifice.