Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 6:1-7

1 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

2 If a soul sin, and commit a trespass against the Lord, and lie unto his neighbour in that which was delivered him to keep, or in fellowship, or in a thing taken away by violence, or hath deceived his neighbour;

3 Or have found that which was lost, and lieth concerning it, and sweareth falsely; in any of all these that a man doeth, sinning therein:

4 Then it shall be, because he hath sinned, and is guilty, that he shall restore that which he took violently away, or the thing which he hath deceitfully gotten, or that which was delivered him to keep, or the lost thing which he found,

5 Or all that about which he hath sworn falsely; he shall even restore it in the principal, and shall add the fifth part more thereto, and give it unto him to whom it appertaineth, in the day of his trespass offering.

6 And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the Lord, a ram without blemish out of the flock, with thy estimation, for a trespass offering, unto the priest:

7 And the priest shall make an atonement for him before the Lord: and it shall be forgiven him for any thing of all that he hath done in trespassing therein.

A few days ago we started examining what I have called the “higher trespass offering,” and the offenses described for it seemed ambiguous. I mentioned in that initial post that the descriptions become much clearer in this chapter. Here we see that if an Israelite cheated something away from his neighbor, in any way, that would make him guilty of having “deceitfully gotten,” and he would remain guilty until this higher trespass offering was made.

There are many ways in which a man might be guilty of this, and the verses go at some length to describe them, but what is most important is that principle of “deceitfully gotten.” In whatever way you managed to acquire your neighbor’s possession, if it was “deceitfully gotten,” you are in the wrong.

It is interesting to note that a cost was applied to the sin itself in how the perpetrator must “add the fifth part” of the item’s value to its restoration. This is different from the laws of “an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth,” where the restitution was meant to be exactly equal to the offense. The key difference between those laws and these is that “an eye for an eye” applied to the destruction and replacement of another person’s property. In today’s case, no permanent destruction took place, so the original item could be returned without replacement. If that was the end of it, then there would be no consideration for the inconvenience to the victim or the ill-gotten benefit of the perpetrator. By telling the perpetrator to “add the fifth part,” you essentially turned the theft into a pricey loan, and the victim gets a rich return.

I have included these first seven verses with my analysis of Chapter 5 because they clearly belong with the second half of that chapter. Verse 8 begins an entirely new subject, and so ought to be considered the true beginning of the next chapter. Thus, I will take my usual intra-chapter interlude here and resume my scriptural analysis next week.

SacrificeEligible oblationStepsExplanation
Higher trespass offeringRam, moneyRestitution for taking from one’s neighbor. Possibly other special cases also.
Ram presumably slaughtered and burnedPresumably spiritual cleansing or restoration
Payment of moneyRestitution for damage and a fine

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 5:17-19

17 And if a soul sin, and commit any 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.

18 And he shall bring a ram without blemish out of the flock, with thy estimation, for a trespass offering, unto the priest: and the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his ignorance wherein he erred and wist it not, and it shall be forgiven him.

19 It is a trespass offering: he hath certainly trespassed against the Lord.

At the start of the chapter we were shown smaller offenses, primarily sins of omission. Here at the end, it now talks about the actual breaking of the commandments, which would be a sin of commission, though still done in ignorance.

Perhaps an example of this would be when we are caught in a shameful situation and immediately minimize it out of a self-preservation instinct, only realizing later that we have told a lie. Or perhaps we bore witness that we actually thought was true, only to learn later that we had propagated falsehoods. Or we might have a culture that insists that fornication is common, expected, and shameless, and it is only after reaping the painful consequences of such choices that we start to realize that we have sinned.

There is an important lesson here: intent is not all that matters, sometimes an act is just wrong. That isn’t to say that intent does not matter at all. Malicious harm is worse than accidental harm, but both are harm either way. We can both give special weight to intent, while also acknowledging the fundamental wrongness of the act regardless of intent. And that is what the sacrifice in these verses seems to be for. Atoning for the act, even in absence of intent.

SacrificeEligible oblationStepsExplanation
Higher trespass offeringRam, moneyFor special trespass cases
Ram presumably slaughtered and burnedPresumably spiritual cleansing or restoration
A “one fifth” payment of moneyPresumably a fine or restitution of damage

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 5:15-16

15 If a soul commit a trespass, and sin through ignorance, in the holy things of the Lord; then he shall bring for his trespass unto the Lord a ram without blemish out of the flocks, with thy estimation by shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary, for a trespass offering:

16 And he shall make amends for the harm that he hath done in the holy thing, and shall add the fifth part thereto, and give it unto the priest: and the priest shall make an atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering, and it shall be forgiven him.

In the last post we talked about the disagreement Bible scholars have as to which infractions were connected to the special trespass offering, and we didn’t really have time to discuss the ritual itself, so today we will address that. This offering required bringing a ram, presumably to be slaughtered in a way similar to what we have seen before, but also a measure of money. The exact amount of money, it would seem, was proportional to the magnitude of the offense. Since, as we discussed previously, we’re not entirely sure the nature of that offense, it is uncertain exactly how and why this fine was calculated.

As already mentioned, the two prevailing theories were that this offering was for cases of violation against the holy things of the tabernacle, or for causing property damage to one’s neighbor. Presumably if the offense was of the first type, the money portion of the offering was added to the temple treasury, then to be used for the maintenance and affairs of the tabernacle. If the offense was of the second type, then verse sixteen seems to be saying that the full price of the damages would be given to the injured party, and then an extra 20 percent. Thus, the money might have been a punitive fine, or it might have been a way of restoring damages. The ram, meanwhile, would have been for spiritual cleansing. Thus, this offering included both spiritual and terrestrial atonement.

SacrificeEligible oblationStepsExplanation
Higher trespass offeringRam, moneyFor special trespass cases
Ram presumably slaughtered and burnedPresumably spiritual cleansing or restoration
Payment of moneyPresumably a fine or restitution of damage

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 5:14-16

14 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

15 If a soul commit a trespass, and sin through ignorance, in the holy things of the Lord; then he shall bring for his trespass unto the Lord a ram without blemish out of the flocks, with thy estimation by shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary, for a trespass offering:

16 And he shall make amends for the harm that he hath done in the holy thing, and shall add the fifth part thereto, and give it unto the priest: and the priest shall make an atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering, and it shall be forgiven him.

We already spent most of this chapter talking about various minor infractions a person might be guilty of, such as failing to bear testimony in a trial, or touching a carcass, or making a promise and not following through on it. And for all of those, a small offering was proscribed to make things right again.

So why, now, are we hearing about trespass offerings requiring a different sacrifice, one that is more substantial? Most scholars conclude that what we are reading now is actually a new section of law, one that is still related to the trespass offerings already covered but is a special or more egregious case.

And there the similarities end. Different commentaries give considerably different interpretations as to what the exact offense being described is.

Some have focused on the phrase: “in the holy things of the Lord,” which comes from the single Hebrew word: קֹדֶשׁ (qodesh), which means a sacred place or thing. Some have therefore assumed that this is describing an offense against something sacred, such as failure to pay tithes and offerings, or misuse by a priest of those funds. It could also be describing when a person who was already in a compromised state (from any of the acts described at the start of this chapter) entered the tabernacle without recognizing that they were “trespassing” on the sacred space of the Lord.

Still others have focused more on the phrase: “the harm that he hath done,” and supposed that this must mean when an Israelite caused property damages to his fellow man. This interpretation gains more credibility in chapter 6, whose first verses more explicitly describe that situation.

At the end of the day, I am not sure exactly which situation that is being described. In fact, it is entirely possible that verse 15 is giving one example of offense, which is related to the misuse or trespass of sacred things, and verse 16 is giving another, which is related to the harming of a neighbor’s property. In any case, it is clear that this amounts to a special situation, one that requires a different method of purification. I will look over this new purification method tomorrow and update our sacrifice table accordingly, being specific on what parts are clear, and generic on what remains ambiguous.

SacrificeEligible oblationStepsExplanation
Higher trespass offeringRam, moneyFor special trespass cases

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 5:11-13 Continued

11 But if he be not able to bring two turtledoves, 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 offering; he shall put no oil upon it, neither shall he put any frankincense thereon: for it is a sin offering.

12 Then shall he bring it to the priest, and the priest shall take his handful of it, even a memorial thereof, and burn it on the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the Lord: it is a sin offering.

13 And the priest shall make an atonement for him as touching 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.

We already examined these verses yesterday, but I noticed something more in them that I wanted to take time on for today. Yesterday we noted how there was an option to sacrifice a bird or to sacrifice flour, and how each were related to reestablishing a positive relationship with God. If the offering was a bird, it was given in a burnt offering, in which the animal was killed, it’s blood drained, and the body burned upon the altar, representing the giving of one’s life to the will of the Lord. If the offering was of flour, it was given in a meat offering, in which a portion of it was shared with the priests.

It occurred to me that between those two: the spilling of blood and the sharing of bread, we see an early form of the sacrament that Jesus would institute with his disciples in the last supper. There he blessed and brake bread, and blessed wine, and shared it with his apostles. The wine brings to mind the blood of the burnt offering, the bread the flour of the meat offering, the sharing with the apostles the sharing with the priests. In one ritual, we see Jesus offering his life to the Father and entering communion with Him. We see him laying down his life for his friends and inviting them to join him in the feast of heaven.

Truly, the New Testament does not eradicate the Old. It completes it. The Old Testament is the walls of the building, and the New Testament is the roof that crowns it. Both are important, both point to the same conclusions.

SacrificeEligible oblationStepsExplanation
Trespass offeringLamb, young goat, two turtledoves, two pigeons, flourFor minor offenses and mistakes
One bird for a sin offering, one for a burnt offeringGiving up of offense and recommitment to the Lord
Some of the grain for a sin offering, some for a meat offeringGiving up of offense and shared communion with the Lord

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 5:11-13

11 But if he be not able to bring two turtledoves, 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 offering; he shall put no oil upon it, neither shall he put any frankincense thereon: for it is a sin offering.

12 Then shall he bring it to the priest, and the priest shall take his handful of it, even a memorial thereof, and burn it on the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the Lord: it is a sin offering.

13 And the priest shall make an atonement for him as touching 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.

As with before, we see that there is an even cheaper and more accessible option than bringing two birds, wherein the offeror could provide some flour for a sin and meat offering. Yesterday we heard about this ritual being made with two birds, and there is an interesting similarity and difference between that method and this one.

With the birds, one was offered for a sin offering, and with the flour, some of it was also offered for a sin offering. That is the similarity. But then the second bird was given for a burnt offering, and the rest of the flour was given as a meat offering and shared with the priests.

In both cases, the first offering represents purification for sin, and in both cases, the second offering represents some form of connection with the Almighty. In the burnt offering it was the commitment of one’s life to God, and in the meat offering it is sharing a meal with the Lord.

One theory for why the second portion of grain was not given as a burnt offering was because that it was not an animal, therefore had no life to give, and therefore wasn’t fit for that symbol. But given that it was good for eating, it was fit for a symbol of sharing communion with the Lord.

In any case, in each form of this offering, we see that we need purification from that which is wrong, and then reunion to God in one way or another.

SacrificeEligible oblationStepsExplanation
Trespass offeringLamb, young goat, two turtledoves, two pigeons, flourFor minor offenses and mistakes
One bird for a sin offering, one for a burnt offeringGiving up of offense and recommitment to the Lord
Some of the grain for a sin offering, some for a meat offeringGiving up of offense and shared communion with the Lord

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 5:7-10

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 for a burnt offering.

8 And he shall bring them unto the priest, who shall offer that which is for the sin offering first, and wring off his head from his neck, but shall not divide it asunder:

9 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: it is a sin offering.

10 And he shall offer the second for a burnt offering, according to the manner: and the priest shall make an atonement for him for his sin which he hath sinned, and it shall be forgiven him.

In the last verses we heard how the person making a trespass offering could give a lamb or a young goat, now we hear that two birds were also acceptable if one could not obtain the larger animals. Interestingly, if one went with the birds, each one represented another sub-offering. The first bird would be a sin offering, the second would be a burnt offering.

The sin offering would merely involve taking the life of the animal and wringing out its blood, nothing burned upon the altar. This, of course, represents the person wringing that which is wrong out of their lives, giving up the sin that holds them back. Then, the burnt offering, that is laid on the altar and burned as a gift to the Lord. This represents the commitment of one’s life to God.

With a larger animal, presumably there was enough material to do both of these steps in one. Blood to be sprinkled or smeared and unclean body parts to be discarded, fulfilling the sin offering portion, and good meat to be consumed on the altar, fulfilling the burnt offering portion.

Having both of these offering types as a part of the trespass offering, we see that in the grammar of sacrificial offerings, sin and burnt offerings were fundamental components, individual words that could be combined together to create more advanced sentences of surrender to the Lord.

SacrificeEligible oblationStepsExplanation
Trespass offeringLamb, young goat, two turtledoves, two pigeonsFor minor offenses and mistakes
One bird for a sin offering, one for a burnt offeringGiving up of offense and recommitment to the Lord

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 5:5-6

5 And it shall be, when he shall be guilty in one of these things, that he shall confess that he hath sinned in that thing:

6 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 goats, for a sin offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his sin.

Having been given examples of the sort of simple trespasses that people might commit, we now hear the offering to be made in such cases. As with other offerings, there will be alternative options for those that are poorer, but today we look at the richest option.

For this offering, a female lamb or kid was to be offered. The method of its slaughter, cleaning, and burning are not here described, but we assume that it was very similar to other animal offerings that we have already read.

This highlights the fact that in the grammar of sacrifice, the same process with the same animal can have the same general meaning (atonement for something amiss), but different specifics according to the context. This makes sense when we think of acts that we might do today, and how they can have different meanings under different contexts. If I give something to my neighbor, I might be restoring something of his that I broke, or giving him a gift to commemorate a moment of celebration, or being thoughtful during a moment of personal tragedy, or performing an act of charity when he’s having a hard time making ends meet. It’s all the same act, giving him something, but it could be for restitution, celebration, compassion, or charity.

So, too, when the ancient Israelite brought something to the altar, he was giving a part of himself to the Lord for some reason, and what that reason was could be different on different according to the context.

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 5:4

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.

Today’s verse talks about when a man makes a pledge or an oath, but something about it is “hid from him,” such that he wasn’t able to fulfill his promise, even though he meant it when he said it. The “hiding” factor could be that he forgot his promise, or he failed to account for conflicting factors that made it impossible, or that he over-committed himself beyond what he could actually do. This is not a terrible sin, but it is an infraction where the integrity of his deeds did not fully match his words.

Clearly this is a common thing even today. I promise to help a friend move, but I forgot I won’t be in town that day. I promise my boss to have my report ready by end of day, but it was more work than I realized. I say that I’ll bring the ice, then sleep through my alarm and miss the whole thing. So long as I genuinely meant to do what I said, then I’m not a liar, and I have no malice, but people are still left wanting and disappointed.

The rituals that we will start to hear about in the following verses would serve as both a way to set things right, and a reminder to be more careful with our promises. We should all endeavor to minimize our failures in promise-keeping and take accountability for any instances that still occur.

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 5:2-3

2 Or if a soul touch any unclean thing, whether it be a carcase of an unclean beast, or a carcase of unclean cattle, or the carcase of unclean creeping things, and if it be hidden from him; he also shall be unclean, and guilty.

3 Or if he touch the uncleanness of man, whatsoever uncleanness 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.

Yesterday’s verse talked about an omission of doing good, where the perpetrator knew he wasn’t behaving as he ought. Today’s verses are different in that the person does something and “it be hidden from him.” Also, they describe situations that are not always a choice: such as stumbling over a carcass or having a nighttime emission.

Later chapters (11-15) will explain that these and other situations make a person temporarily unable to enter the tabernacle. It is not that the person has sinned, just that they are in a common state where they need to wait a day before entering the holy place of the Lord, and in certain cases bring a small offering.

Therefore, the situations described in this verse are not an indictment of the individual so much as an acknowledgement of the crudity of this world. Take, for example, how it obviously isn’t a wrong thing to defecate, but also, we would be mortified to do so in front of others. Just by living this mortal life, we will all have moments awkwardness. We do not need to feel ashamed for them, but neither should we deny that they are, in fact, awkward. And when we come to the house of the Lord, we should make the effort to come as the best that we can be.