THE SIN OFFERING AND THE TRESPASS OFFERING This chapter presents to us practical examples of the unintentional sins for which a sin offering is offered; Although, according to some scholars, this sacrifice, though offered for a particular sin, yet it is offered to take away all the sins of a person or persons, and not a particular sin, as it is the case in the trespass offering. It, as well, made clear the sins and iniquities on which a trespass offering is offered, after dealing with those who could not afford to offer a sin offering. 1- Examples of unintentional sins 1 - 4 2- The sin offering and the confession 5 - 6 3- The sin offering of those who could not afford it 7 - 13 4- The first kind of trespass offering 14 - 19 1- EXAMPLES OF UNINTENTIONAL SINS: The divine inspiration gave us three examples of unintentional sins, for which a sin offering is offered: a- He who suppresses a testimony (1): In case a believer hears a person accused or a witnesses not telling the truth, while under oath; If he knows the truth, hides it, and does not tell it, either for feeling compassion on the accused or for bearing bad intention against him, “he bears his guilt” (1); namely, he would be counted as a partaker of the sin of the accused in the sight of God; and would be counted as responsible for any probable erroneous verdict, whether for, or against the accused. And if he is sought to give testimony, and abstained for some reason or another; and because of his reluctance to testify, an unjust verdict was issued; he is committed to confess his sin, and offer a sin offering. According to the scholar Origen: [Man’s contention on a wrong doing committed by another, is counted as sin, even if he does not follow suit]. And he says: [It is befitting of us to know that he who happens to catch a neighbor in the act, hides the issue, and does not tell the truth nor testify to it, will bear the sin of the guilty whom he has covered up; and on him will come his same punishment. This does not apply to him who shows compassion on his neighbor, and admonishes him to exhort him to repentance; but it applies to him who disregards his neighbor’s salvation, by covering up his evil. In a symbolic interpretation, the scholar Origen believes that those who suppressed the testimony were the scribes and the Pharisees, who, being entrusted with the law of God, were aware of what was written concerning the Lord Christ, saying: “The Lord has sworn, and will not relent, ‘You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchzedek” (Psalm 109 (110): 4).; Having suppressed that testimonial, and refrained from proclaiming their faith in the Savior Messiah, in whom the prophesies were fulfilled, they fell under the sin, having led Israel into their denial of the Lord Christ. b- “Whoever touches the carcass of an unclean animal”, whether wild, domestic or a reptile, if he disregards, or was unintentionally slothful to purify himself by washing his clothes (Leviticus 11: 24-38), he would be counted as guilty, and is committed to offer a sin offering. It also extends to unintentionally touching a leper, or someone with bodily discharges (Leviticus 14, 15), or touching the corpse of a dead man (Leviticus 21), then knew later about it, and did not purify himself, he would be committed to offer a sin offering. On a health wise aspect, God probably intends, under the name of ‘defiled’ or ‘unclean’, to warn the people against touching anything that may cause illness or may transfers contagion.. Of a lengthy comment by the scholar Origen, on the issue of uncleanness that would dwell by touching an unclean animal or a dead man’s corpse, we shall quote the following statements:: [Let us now see how the explanation and interpretation presented by the Jews may seem as unconvincing, unbefitting, and worthy to be rejected; to believe that he who touches the carcass of a dead animal, or the corpse of a dead man, would be counted as unclean, even if the dead corpse belongs to a prophet, a patriarch, even Abraham Himself?! … Will he who touches the bones of the prophet Elisha that raised a man from the dead, be considered unclean?! As far as we are concerned, let us define first what is meant by “unclean touching’, and ‘pure touching’… . According to the apostle: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman” (1 Corinthians 7: 1); … About ‘unclean touching’ the Lord Christ said: “Whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5: 28); on account of that his heart was touched by the lust and became unclean. Looking at a woman to lust for her, gathering wealth with greed, or finding pleasure by any other means, are considered as ‘unclean touching’ with sin, for which you are committed to offer a sin offering. Do you wish me to give you an example of someone who was previously unclean, then became pure by pure touching; let me mention the woman with a flow of blood who spent all her livelihood on physicians and could not be healed by any (Luke 8: 45, 46); she who might have reached that stage through the uncleanness of sin, and caused harm to her own body But through touching, by faith, the border of the garment of the Lord Christ, she was instantly healed and became clean. When she touched the Lord Savior, He said “Who touched Me?”… For I perceived power going out of Me” … Surely it was the power that healed that woman and made her pure; contrary to the evil power that came out of the sin, that made her, for such a long time, unclean and overcome with sickness…. The same interpretation would apply to touching the corpse of a dead man, or that of a clean or unclean animal. For whoever touches the body of man, may imply following his lead, being dead in his sins. To clarify the touching of those corpses, let us deal with each of them one by one: As to touching the corpse of a dead man, let us hear what the apostle said to the Corinthians: “I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner – not even to eat with such a person” (1 Corinthians 5: 9-11). Beside what the apostle said concerning the widow: “But she who lives in pleasure is dead while she lives” (1 Timothy 5: 6). About such a person we may say that she is like a corpse of a dead man]. The scholar origin, concerning touching the corpse of a dead man, goes on to say: [In the church there are those who may be called “men of God”, the way the prophet Elijah say about himself: “If I am a man of God, , then let fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty men” (2 Kings 1: 10); While those who forsake reason and understanding, are counted as animals; about whom the psalmist says: “O Lord, You preserve man and beast” (Psalm 36: 6). In case any of those people dies in sin, and becomes a corpse, , … he who touches it, will be unclean. That is concerning the domestic animals; as to the vicious wild animals, the scholar Origen believes that ‘a dead lion’ refers to getting attached to the devil, about whom the apostle Peter says: “The devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour. Resist him, steadfast in faith” (1 Peter 5: 8, 9); and ‘the savage wolves’ refer to the heretics, according to the words of the apostle, saying: “For I know this, after my departure, savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20: 29); those who follow their faulty views, will be as though have become unclean through touching a corpse of a dead wolf. c- “If a man slothfully swears in vain to do evil or to do good” (4); …then he did contrary to his vow; this could be counted as a sin that warrants a sin offering. Some may wonder if someone swears to beat or to kill, then refrained from doing it, will this be counted as a sin that warrants offering a sin offering? … The sin here will be, not in refraining from doing harm, but rather in hastening to swear. The scholar Origen, presents to us a symbolic interpretation of double swearing to do both good and harm; he says that entering into a fellowship with God, the believer would be as though presents a vow to do good for the salvation of his spirit; and to do harm to his body lusts; being committed to discipline and to humiliate his flesh that lusts against his spirit (Galatians 5: 17); For by disciplining his body, he would say together with the apostle Paul: “For when I am weak , then I am strong” (2 Corinthians 12: 10). According to the scholar Origen: [If we swear and promise to discipline this body which opposes and wrestles against the spirit, and did not fulfill our promise, we would be guilty of a sin; … For we cannot do good to our spirit, unless we apply pressure on our body; Let us listen to what the Lord Himself says: “I am the One who bring forth life and death”. What does the Lord “bring to death? Obviously the lusts of the body; And what does He bring to life? Obviously the Spirit. He also adds: “I strike and heal”. What does He strike? Obviously the body lusts; And what does He heal? Obviously the Spirit.. What is the goal of all this? To “put to death in the flesh, and to make alive by the Spirit” 1 Peter 3: 18], For fear that you would serve the law of God, not by the Spirit but by the body]. These are the three examples presented to us by the book of Leviticus concerning the sins which warrant a sin offering: {Refraining to testify the truth; touching the unclean; and not fulfilling a vow}. Yet with a condition that those sins are committed unintentionally, and not out of stubbornness. Rich in mercy, God intends to purify His children and people, even from sins that mat seem as though of little importance; not out of being particular on the letter, but of seeking to sanctify us on the highest level; and intending to make man like the angels of God, living by the laws of heaven. Being aware of our weaknesses, not intending to be hard on us, and wishing for us to be heavenly, God opened before us the way of holiness by His Holy Spirit, and presented to us the life of His Son, delivered on the cross as a price to sanctify us. In other words, being so particular, He does not intend just to issue commands, nor to humiliate and deprive us; But, as our Heavenly Father, He seeks our spiritual maturity and exaltation, to become worthy of hearing the divine voice, saying: “I said you are gods, and all of you are the children of the Most High. (Psalm 82: 6; John 10: 34). 2- THE SIN OFFERING AND THE CONFESSION: “And it shall be, when he is guilty of any of these matters, that he shall confess that he has sinned in that thing; and he shall bring to the Lord for his sin which he has sinned, a female from the flock, a lamb or a kid of the goats as a sin offering. So the priest shall make atonement for him concerning his sin” (5, 6) Discovering his sin, even though unintentional, it is befitting of the believer to proclaim his longing for a holy, blameless life in the Lord; to present an inner repentance bound to two things: to confess that he has sinned (5), and to offer a sin offering (6). Confessing our sins would then meld with holding fast to the precious blood, the forgiver of sins. The Jews practiced confession of their sins before the men of God and His priests. In the old covenant, like when Joshua the son of Nun sought from Achan the son of Carmi (Joshua 7: 19); … What king Saul did before the prophet Samuel ((2 Samuel 12: 13, 14); … And when the Jews came to John the Baptist confessing their sins (Mark 1: 5). In the New Covenant, the Lord gave His disciples the authority to absolve sins (Matthew 16: 19; 18: 17, 18; john 20: 21, 23); And in the book of Acts, it was said: “And many who had believed came confessing and telling their deeds” (Acts 19: 18). The scholar Origen refers the importance of confession to that the devil provokes us to sin , and once we fall into it, he hastens to accuse us. If we, however, hasten to accuse ourselves, we would make his tricks in vain. He says: [We are committed to confess all our deeds, and to proclaim openly before the congregation, what we have done in the darkness (John 7: 4), and what lie hidden in our minds … As the devil, our enemy and accuser, who provokes us to sin, accuses us, if we take the initiation in this life, to rebuke ourselves, we would overcome his craftiness. As said by the prophet: “State your case, that you may be acquitted” (Isaiah 43: 26 – the Septuagint version); by which he intends to make it clear, that you ought to go forth ahead of him who is always ready to accuse you; Speak up before he does; For if you so do, and present the sacrifice of repentance, you would be as though, deliver your body to destruction, “that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1 Corinthians 5: 5); to hear the voice saying, “You have received the evil things in your life, and now you are comforted” (Luke 16: 25); beside what the prophet David, by the divine inspiration proclaims: “I acknowledge my sin to You; and my iniquity I have not hidden . I said, ‘I will confess my transgressions to the Lord’, and You forgave the iniquity of my sin” (Psalm 32: 5). Now you may see that, confessing sin means the worthiness of being forgiven; and by initiating to accuse yourself, you overcome the devil’s attempt to accuse you. Condemning ourselves is useful for our salvation; whereas if we wait until the devil accuses us, the condemnation will then turn into punishment. Talking about repentance, and binding it to confession St. Ambrose says: [Do not refrain from practicing confession in the church that supplicates on your behalf to God, to win for yourself the help of the holy congregation. There is no point of being ashamed; for we are all sinners; but the humblest will be more commended; and he who feels that he is less, will be counted as righteous]. According to father Dorotheos: [Satan will be able to catch him who trusts in his own mind, and who feels comfortable only in his own will; but he would be helpless before him who does everything through counsel]. And according to St. Anthony: [I saw many monks, who, after long labor, faced failure of reason; on account of that they trusted only in their own knowledge; not listening to the commandment, saying: ‘Ask your father to tell you; and your elders to counsel you’]. 3- THE SIN OFFERING OF THOSE WHO COULD NOT AFFORD IT: As the sacrifice of sin is compulsory on the rich as well as on the poor, the law was keen on making it according to the possibility of each. The value of the offering is not in its material price, nor in the offering itself, but in what it refers to, of a symbol of the free sacrifice of the Lord Christ, which He presented for all with no discrimination. In case someone cannot afford a female lamb or goat, he can offer two turtledoves or two pigeons; about which we have already talked as a burnt offering (1: 14-17); and said that the turtledoves refer to the pure life, and the pigeons to the simple life. Choosing two birds, is because of the difficulty to separate the fat from the flesh to offer on the altar, and to give the priests their portion of the flesh; one of them, counted, therefore, instead of the fat, is offered on the altar, and the other is given to the priests as a portion instead of the flesh. The law was keen on giving the priests a portion from the poor, even a slain turtledove of little material value, not to be enjoyed by the priests, as much as to let them feel that they are priests and ministers of the rich, as well as of the poor, with no discrimination, so as not to be partial in their services. On another aspect, to keep the poor from feeling inferior when dealing with the priests. … Even though the church provides him with all his spiritual and material needs, the poor is committed to present a little, even from what he has taken from the church, as a sign of his spiritual and material fellowship. I wish we do not despise the two mites of the widow, and the two turtledoves of the poor; for God looks at the heart, and not at the gift. … And I wish, if we are poor, not to feel ashamed to offer the little; on account of that God’s hand stretches to take from the poor the gift of his love. It is to be noticed that the bird which is burned as a sin offering is called “a burnt offering”, not that it is as such, but because it is burned whole without separating the fat from the flesh. Here, the great compassion of God toward man is clearly shown, in that He allows the poor who sinned, and cannot afford even two turtledoves or two pigeons, to bring a sin offering of one tenth of an ephah of fine flour. And in order to distinguish it from the grain offering mentioned in (chapter 2), He commanded not to put oil, nor any frankincense on it; on account of that such offering is not offered to honor the Lord as a grain offering, but as an atonement on a sin. … Yet, some may wonder, how could flour be offered as a sin offering, when “without shedding of blood there is no remission” (Hebrew 9: 22)? To answer this, we say that the priest shall take a handful of it as a memorial portion and burn it on the altar according to the offerings made by fire to the Lord; And the flour will then mix with the blood of the other sacrifices offered on the altar. S ome believe that this offering refer to the sacrifice of the Eucharist, which, even though it does not bear blood in a material obvious touched way, yet the bread and the wine truly transform into the body and the blood of the Savior, delivered on the cross, as atonement on our sins. 4- THE FIRST KIND OF THE TRESPASS OFFERING: As we said before, some distinguish between the sin offering and the trespass offering, by that the former is offered for the one offering it as a whole; whereas the later is offered on a particular sin he has committed. And some others distinguish between them by that the former is offered on the sins which cause no specific material harm; whereas the later is offered on sins which cause harm to the sanctuary or to the congregation. Hence, the holy inspiration divides the iniquity offerings into two kinds: a- Sacrifices offered on sins which cause harm to the divine sanctuaries b- Sacrifices offered on sins that cause harm to the brethren. In this chapter he talks about the first kind; saying: “If a person commits a trespass, and sins unintentionally in regard to the holy things of the Lord, then he shall bring to the Lord as his trespass offering a ram without blemish from the flocks with your valuation in shekels of silver according to the shekel of the sanctuary, as a trespass offering And he shall make restitution for the harm he has done in regard to the holy thing, and shall add one fifth to it and give it to the priest. So the priest shall make atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering, and it shall be forgiven him” (15, 16) By the unintentional harm done against the holy things, are meant the slothfulness in offering the commitments toward the temple; like the firstfruit of the clean animals, the redemption for the firstfruit of man, the firstfruit of fruits, and the tithes …etc. In the book of Malachi it is written: “Will a man rob God? Yet you have robbed Me! But you say, ‘In what way have we robbed you?’; in tithes and offerings” (Malachi 3: 8).. By saying ‘unintentional’ here, is meant forgetting or misunderstanding the law. Here, man is committed to offer a sin offering; as there is no forgiveness of sin, even if it is unintentionally done, or because of misunderstanding the law, except by the holy blood which purifies of every sin. Yet, this atonement does not mean disregarding to mend the material harm done on others, even if the harmed party is the temple itself, which, although would never be materially harmed, on account of that God is the source of its satisfaction, but the goal of the law is to train man on paying back what he has unlawfully taken from others, whoever they are. Now, the magnitude of this harm was evaluated by the prophet Moses himself (15); and later by a priest (27: 8). And the valuation of the harm was done in shekels of silver, according to the shekel kept in the sanctuary, as the true and legal measure of the shekel. If God, in His limitless love, forgives every sin we commit, Yet, for the sake of our spiritual edification, He seeks from us to pay back what we awe through our slothfulness, in addition to a chastisement penalty equal to-one fifth. But according to the scholar Origen, the person involved pays back the original amount, plus an equal amount, plus on-fifth of it. If therefore, the harm done represents five shekels of silver, he is committed to pay back five plus five plus one more shekel. Anyway, if the figure five, according to many fathers, like the scholar Origen, saints Dedymus the blind, Augustine, and Jerome, refers to the five senses of man, which should be dedicated only to the Lord, and wholly absorbed in His love, for us to join the five wise virgins (Matthew 25: 1), to receive the heavenly Groom with five lamps full of oil, lighted by the Holy Spirit; For the harm done by sinning against those divine statutes, the Lord does not seek from us to pay money or to present offerings, as much as to present our senses, in the unity of the Spirit, holy to the Lord; Namely, to give back to the Lord His right of possession on us, and in our depth, in order to live holy for Him inside, as well as in our outer behavior. Now, concerning the “the shekel of the sanctuary”, considered as the measure for the restitution, It was a measure to weigh the precious things; or might be some kind of silver or gold coins, according to which all coins or other measurements were calibrated. There were more than one kind of shekel known to the Jews: the regular shekel, to measure the precious things like silver and gold and others (1 Samuel 17: 5); the “shekel of the sanctuary”, said to be double as much as the regular one, which was kept in the tabernacle of meeting or the temple, to be a calibrated model of the true shekel; and “the shekel of the king” (2 Samuel 14: 26), that probably referred to a specific measure kept with the king. The Hebrews used the shekel of silver as money, after the captivity in the time of the Meccabians; mentioned in the New Covenant as “silver” (Matthew 26: 15); And also “the gold shekel”, which was used as a weight, as well as a gold coin. We go back now to the restitution to be offered by the sinner, with his repentance, and his return to the Lord. Moses (or the priest) valuate the amount of harm done to the temple, on the material aspect, by the “shekel of the sanctuary” of silver. As silver refers to the word of God,” like silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times” (Psalm 12)… The priest valuate our behavior, therefore, not according to his human wisdom, or his personal perception, but according to “the word of God”; the measure of our life, by which we shall present our accounts with God on the day of judgment. Being “the shekel of the sanctuary”, namely, a true, unfeigned shekel. According to the scholar Origen: {The shekel of the sanctuary” portrays our faith … There are actually many who carry the name of Christ, yet they, in truth, have no Christ in them. Hence the apostle Paul says: “For there must also be factions among you, that those who are approved may be recognized among you” (1 Corinthians 11” 19)}. We, therefore, purchase the ‘lamb’ to be offered as a sin offering, valuated by “the shekel of the sanctuary”; In other words, we encounter the Lord Christ, the true lamb of God through the true unfeigned holy faith. As according to the scholar Origen: [Surely, no one can have forgiveness of his sins, unless he has the straightforward, the tested, and holy faith; by which we can acquire the “lamb”, who cleanses the sins of the believers. That is “the shekel of the sanctuary”; the tested faith, not mixed with deception and craftiness; namely with the hypocrisy of the heretics, by which we present a straightforward faith to be cleansed by “the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Peter 1: 19).
Welcome