Tag: Leviticus

As we move into chapter 5, it’s probably appropriate to try and make distinctions, where possible, among the sacrifices over the last few chapters and into this one. Although often called the “sin” offering (a reasonable translation but perhaps not exactly the concept as we normally think of it), chapter 4 should be more appropriately referred to as the purification offering. The whole point is purify the tabernacle so they can even enter to be able to offer the burnt offering that is actually for atonement. The presence of sin defiles God’s sanctuary so it must be purified. sin doesn’t happen in a vacuum, it pollutes things around it. So this offering addresses that. God is not endangered by this pollution of course, but man certainly is. We know when unclean and holy attempt to occupy the same space, holy wins and unclean is destroyed.

So chapter 5 continues addressing situations where common folks require the purification offering. Note that the lay folk don’t bring as valuable an offering compared to the priest (a nanny-goat or lamb vs. a bull, or even pigeons, turtledoves or flour if they’re poor). Particularly, the examples are sins of omission, times when you are supposed to do something but intentionally choose not to. Broad point is that things that are sinful or that make people unclean are applicable in fact, even if we are unaware of them. You can be unclean and not know it or have committed a sin and not realized it (basically the opposite of walking into it willfully). Either way, it’s still true and still has impacts. And, as soon as you are made aware of it, regardless of how, it must be addressed. (Our tendency may be to figure that since it’s been some time and is separated from the event, it can just be ignored. That would be a mistake. As noted before, sin has consequences and impacts beyond the event itself.)

Then the discussion switches to discussing the guilt or reparation offering (reparation is probably a more appropriate way to talk about it as the core focus is on addressing those additional consequences of sin, more specifically violating God’s holiness. The examples include trespassing on God’s holy stuff (could be eating holy food, touching stuff dedicated for the priests, etc.) but done unintentionally. Once it’s realized, the reparation sacrifice must be made and a restitution must be made to make up for what was defiled.

The next example seems mostly the same although this one is likely pointed to someone who doesn’t know exactly what he defiled, he just feels a guilt. Basically, someone believes they have sinned against sacred property but aren’t sure how. So, they make the reparation offering, but there is no extra fifth to tack on for this one because he doesn’t know exactly what he infringed on. Although it moves into chapter 6, the first few verses that follow are of similar concept, someone infringes upon God’s holiness by swearing falsely (lying and using God’s name to seal the deal). The reparation offering must be made (in addition to the purification offering, to allow access to make the burnt offering for the sin itself).

So, up to this point, we have various sacrifices of offerings that describe the effects of sin and how to remedy it. The burnt offering focuses on the individual, a sinner who deserves to die and an animal dying in his place. God accepts the animal as ransom or covering for man. The purification offering uses a medical view, sin makes the world dirty so that God can no longer dwell in it (it’s unclean). The blood of the animal cleanses the sanctuary so God can still be present with his people. And the reparation offering sees sin as a debt that man incurs against God. The debt is paid through the offered animal.

The narrative coming out of Exodus continues and the Lord calls to Moses from the tabernacle (the new tent of meeting) and begins to tell him how various aspects of the worship related to the tabernacle should be undertaken. First up, the burnt offering.

Now, as we start to read and try to understand the offerings, we’ll often find that we don’t have as much information as we want. Some of these instructions have an assumed level of understanding or pre-existing communal knowledge that isn’t included in the text because everyone already kind of gets it. As such, we’re going to do our best to call out what we believe to be true according to the information we have and then be cautious and prudent with any speculation outside of that.

The first two things we learn about the burnt offering is that it is on behalf of an individual (vs. the whole group) and that what is being offered must come from the owner’s own herd or flock. This is interesting in that it means that the offering must cost the person something, you can’t just go snare a wild beast and bring him to the Lord as an offering. We see David echo this thought in 2 Samuel 24:24: “I will not offer a burnt offering to the Lord my God which cost me nothing.”

Further, the offering must be a male without blemish. Again, we’re speaking to something costly, as the males were more prized and it couldn’t be some kind of limp, bedraggled character that you’d be happy to be rid of anyway. Only the best is good enough for God. The Lord calls out Israel in Malachi for trying to get away with shifty behavior in this area, “‘You sniff at me,’ says the Lord of Hosts; ‘You bring what has been taken by violence or is lame or sick, and this you bring as your offering. Shall I accept that from your hand?’ says the Lord”.

By the way, just so we don’t miss it, this expensive. It’d be something to sacrifice an entire young cow today, let alone in OT times when meat was a rare luxury for all but the very rich. Yes, the offering accommodates the variations of what people can afford (could be bull, sheep/goats, or birds), but it’s costly either way.

So, the animal is brought to the entrance of the tabernacle (tent of meeting), and the owner places his hand on the head of the burnt offering (and prays, those things are connected in Scripture) and it is accepted to make atonement (Hebrew word kipper – said “kip-air”, meaning “to cover” or “ransom”) for him. The guilt is acknowledged here, this situation is a consequence of action taken by the animal’s owner. Then he kills the animal, washes the dirty parts, cuts it all into pieces so it can be burnt on the altar. Note that the owner of the beast does all of this, it is handed off to the priests only to tend the fire that it will burn on (and also keep the skin of the animal).

A couple things. First, we want the sacrifice to be accepted because the general goal of it is peace with God (or right relationship). It is to be a “soothing aroma” to God, it is done in worship as something that pleases Him. This isn’t the first time we’ve seen this, recall that Noah makes a burnt offering to God after the flood and God reacts to it saying that it is a soothing aroma and promises to never flood the earth again (Genesis 8).

Further, the clearest identification of the purpose of the sacrifice comes from the word atonement. Although it debated among folks whether to consider it this way, I think this clearly is an offering in reaction to sin (with some differences from the upcoming purification and sin offerings). This is an atonement, an action taken as a “cover” or “ransom” for sin that created a lack of peace between a person and God. In this situation, God has agreed to accept this sacrifice, where the sin is seemingly passed through to the animal on behalf of the owner, and then killed and entirely consumed by the fire. Why does this work? Well, the basic answer is because God said it does. Perhaps more specifically, Leviticus 17:11 tells us that the blood of the animal represents its life and God is willing to accept its blood instead of yours. (Yes, we should certainly see Jesus in this, this is exactly what he does completely and finally on our behalf).

The one thing that should jump out clearly here, fellas, is that in a reality where Jesus has already come and died for us, we run the risk of not recognizing the cost of our sin. If you were an Israelite at the time of Moses, you didn’t forget because you had to haul one of your beasts up there in the presence of sin in your life and it died on your behalf (in fact, you did the killing). Folk saw you bring it up, it took a decent effort to kill, clean and cut it up, and you had to do it all over again the next time.

Conceptually, the same thing happens with Jesus, we just don’t have to live it out physically. He dies because God wants peace with us and He provides a sacrifice so that it can be (as noted in the introduction, the absence of this concept either denies that broken relationships are actually broken or creates a world where we can never have peace with God). Your sin put the nails in His hands, the crown on His head, and the spear in His side. But you weren’t physically there. Your sin is bundled with millions of others into that crown and into those nails and your part doesn’t get re-enacted over and over again. That is an amazing mercy, let us not forget it by treating are sin with nonchalance.

Dig on this tune, which has relevance to what we were just talking about:

Chapter 1 continues with how to handle the burnt sacrifices for either sheep/goats or birds, reflecting what people actually have available to them to sacrifice. Nothing significantly differs in the process for the other animals, just enough to accommodate distinctions that inherently exist in differences between say birds and bulls.

It’s worth noting that burnt offerings do not appear to be exclusive to atonement. Primarily, it brought reconciliation between God and man but also expressed faith in God and obedience to his law and could be offered in fulfillment of a vow. Either way, of all the sacrifices, this one is all encompassing; the entire animal is consumed in the fire and none is shared or left for either the original owner or the priests (again, except the skin).