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.

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 5:1

1 And if a soul sin, and hear the voice of swearing, and is a witness, whether he hath seen or known of it; if he do not utter it, then he shall bear his iniquity.

In our last chapter we learned about the sin offering, which was to be made when an individual or the congregation had ignorantly broken one of God’s commandments, and committed an act of sin. In this next chapter we move to the category of trespass offerings, which cover lesser offenses. As we will see, one key difference between a trespass and a sin is that a sin is a willful committing of something wrong, whereas a trespass if often an act of omission.

There are many times where instead of doing something actively good or moral, we shrink from it. It is a sin of omission, not commission. We might not lie, but we refrain from telling the truth. That is still wrong, but not as wrong.

And that is exactly the situation described in the first verse. “Hear the voice of swearing” is apparently a reference to their legal system, where a witness would be called to testify of an event. And if a person is called as a witness, and he does not give a full and honest account of what he saw or heard, then today’s verse says that he is a trespasser.

Like all of our social orders, the legal system can only work with the good-faith cooperation of the people. A society needs people to be more committed to its underlying principles, than to themselves or their friends. If the people will not support an orderly society, then worse patterns of anarchy and tyranny will prevail. And so, such a man is guilty of a trespass, and needs to make atonement and receive grace.

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 4:32-35

32 And if he bring a lamb for a sin offering, he shall bring it a female without blemish.

33 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin offering, and slay it for a sin offering in the place where they kill the burnt offering.

34 And the priest shall take of the blood of the sin offering with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out all the blood thereof at the bottom of the altar:

35 And he shall take away all the fat thereof, as the fat of the lamb is taken away from the sacrifice of the peace offerings; and the priest shall burn them upon the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the Lord: and the priest shall make an atonement for his sin that he hath committed, and it shall be forgiven him.

In addition to the option for a common Israelite to offer a young goat as a sin offering, he could also offer a lamb. The next chapter might suggest that two turtledoves or pigeons would also be an option for the very poor, though on the other hand it might be referring to a trespass offering instead.

In any case, we have now come to the end of this chapter on sin offerings. We have seen how the same pattern was to be applied to an individual, a community, a priest, and a leader. In all cases, the offeror placed his/their hand(s) upon the sacrifice, the animal was slaughtered, blood was placed on the horns, fat and kidneys were burned on the altar, and the body and dirty parts of the animal were burned outside of the camp. The only difference was whether the animal was a bullock, a goat, or a lamb.

It is interesting to note that the offering was one single animal, no matter how many people it applied to. Whether the entire congregation or a single, solitary soul, the offering was just one animal. This frustrates our common tendency to quantify sin and forgiveness in measurable terms. We have an innate desire to reduce offense to a number and be able to apply good works of equal number to “pay” for the offense. But that’s not how the patterns of the Spirit work. If it were, we would quickly become too “indebted in sin” to ever pay it off.

If there are any measurements and debts and payments, all of that is resolved in the atonement of Jesus Christ. All that remains for us, and for the ancient Israelites, is a ritualistic return to the right path. When we view these offerings as a symbol of commitment, not as a payment for sin, it makes sense why a single offering could stand in for any number of offerors.

SacrificeEligible oblationStepsExplanation
Sin offeringBullock, young goat, lambSacrifice for sin
The same pattern for an individual, community, priest, or leaderAn equal path to God for all
Hands placed on head, slaughteredAnimal takes the place of us
Blood placed on horns of the altarA heartfelt plea to the Lord for mercy
Fat and kidneys burned on altarCleansing our behavior and desire
Skin, dung, and flesh burned beyond the campThe sinful behavior purged out of us

Full table.

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 4:27-31

27 And if any one of the common people sin through ignorance, while he doeth somewhat against any of the commandments of the Lord concerning things which ought not to be done, and be guilty;

28 Or if his sin, which he hath sinned, come to his knowledge: then he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a female without blemish, for his sin which he hath sinned.

29 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin offering, and slay the sin offering in the place of the burnt offering.

30 And the priest shall take of the blood thereof with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out all the blood thereof at the bottom of the altar.

31 And he shall take away all the fat thereof, as the fat is taken away from off the sacrifice of peace offerings; and the priest shall burn it upon the altar for a sweet savour unto the Lord; and the priest shall make an atonement for him, and it shall be forgiven him.

Now we come to how the sin offering was performed for the common Israelite, following the same basic pattern as for the leader, the congregation, and the priest. Today let us focus on an element that has been in all of these repeated descriptions, but that we have not yet had time to touch on.

Notice in verse 27 how it says these offerings are for those that “sin through ignorance,” and it has said the same thing for each other instance. So that would mean ways that people trespassed against God’s law without knowing or meaning to. Perhaps they overlooked a ritual, or forgot a commandment, or were unsure of the moral rightness of an action and later regretted their decision.

This, of course, would be different from deliberate and serious sin. Later, in the book of Numbers, we will hear about “high-handed sin,” which means an act of willful defiance against the Lord. For these people, they were what Paul called “under the law,” meaning subject to the penalties of crime. Whether that meant exile, curses, or even death.

Thus, we are meant to understand that the tabernacle ordinances were meant for those who were actively trying to follow God. Yes, those that brought a sin offering had sinned, but they were still oriented towards doing what was right, and they just needed to correct the minor indiscretions common to life. However, if a person were living a deliberately sinful lifestyle, then they would not be taking part in rituals and sacrifices. They would first need to repent, return to the path of goodness, and then would take part in the rituals, now that they were sincerely trying to follow the Father.

SacrificeEligible oblationStepsExplanation
Sin offeringBullock, young goatSacrifice for sin
The same performance for an individual, community, priest, or leaderAn equal path to God for all
Hands placed on head, slaughteredAnimal takes the place of us
Blood placed on horns of the altarA heartfelt plea to the Lord for mercy
Fat and kidneys burned on altarCleansing our behavior and desire
Skin, dung, and flesh burned beyond the campThe sinful behavior purged out of us

Full table.

Scriptural Analysis- Leviticus 4:22-26

22 When a ruler hath sinned, and done somewhat through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord his God concerning things which should not be done, and is guilty;

23 Or if his sin, wherein he hath sinned, come to his knowledge; he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a male without blemish:

24 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the goat, and kill it in the place where they kill the burnt offering before the Lord: it is a sin offering.

25 And the priest shall take of the blood of the sin offering with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out his blood at the bottom of the altar of burnt offering.

26 And he shall burn all his fat upon the altar, as the fat of the sacrifice of peace offerings: and the priest shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin, and it shall be forgiven him.

We’ve already seen how the sin offering applied to a priest and to the congregation, now we read how it applies to a leader also. In this instance we see the same pattern play out exactly as before, except with one particular changed. While atonement was made for the priest and the congregation via a bullock, the leader would make his offering from a young goat.

A bullock was a more substantial offering than a goat. Thus, atonement for a congregation or for a priest was weightier than that for a leader. All Israelites engaged in the same sin offering, coming to the Lord equally and following the same pattern, but slight variances like these show that there was still a hierarchy in play. A leader, such as a king, was not weightier than the nation or a priest, something that has been forgotten at times in history.

SacrificeEligible oblationStepsExplanation
Sin offeringBullock, young goatSacrifice for sin
The same performance for an individual, community, priest, or leaderAn equal path to God for all
Hands placed on head, slaughteredAnimal takes the place of us
Blood placed on horns of the altarA heartfelt plea to the Lord for mercy
Fat and kidneys burned on altarCleansing our behavior and desire
Skin, dung, and flesh burned beyond the campThe sinful behavior purged out of us

Full table.