Vayikra – “And he called” (Leviticus 1:1-5:26(6:7) – Part 5 This is our last comment on this Torah portion. 4) The laws about the “sin offering” begin in Leviticus 4:2. “If a person sins unintentionally in any of the things which the LORD has commanded not to be done, and commits any of them.” The word for sin offering in Hebrew is “chattat.” It is translated as a “sin offering” because the Hebrew word for “sin” is “chata.” But in reality, the two words have a different origin. “Chattat” means “purification.” It was an offering for purification. How do we know this? Because there are other situations when a “chattat” was required and the individual had not sinned. After childbirth, a woman had to bring a “chattat.” When someone had undertaken a Nazarite vow and he came into contact with a dead body, he had to bring a “chattat.” To complete his vow, a Nazarite had to bring a “chattat.” After his cleansing, the leper had to offer a “chattat.” There was no sin involved here. It is clear that the real meaning of a “chattat” is for ritual purification. There are some verses where even the word “chata” is translated as “purify.” One of the most popular is Psalm 51:7, “Purify (chata) me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.” Another is Exodus 29:36: “You shall purify (chata) the altar when you make atonement for it, and you shall anoint it to consecrate it.” This will shed some light on our further discussion of the “sin offering.” The sin or purification offering was not a voluntary offering. According to Maimonides (Rambam), a sin offering was mandated by God when a person inadvertently committed a sin which incurred the penalty called “karet”, being “cut off” from the people, or the divine death sentence. Many who read the Bible understand a sin offering to absolve a person from sin prior to our Master’s death. We believe this is a misunderstanding of the application of a sin offering. The Torah says a sin offering was brought “if a person sins unintentionally.” The Torah does not establish any sacrifice at all for intentional sin! Let’s stop and think about this for a moment. If the Torah had defined a sacrifice that atoned for intentional sin, it would have been a sanction for disobedience by assigning a price tag (the price paid for the animal) to sin. This would imply that one could buy forgiveness. One would have license to sin because he could buy an animal or bird, whatever he could afford, and offer it on the altar the next day. On the contrary, there was no offering that paid the penalty for sin, whether intentional or unintentional. There is only one thing prescribed for sin, and one thing only. It is what Yeshua taught us, and it is consistent with the Torah, the Prophets and the Writings, or the Old Testament. That one thing is repentance. God is the same, He does not change. Repentance was required for forgiveness before Yeshua, just as much as it is required now after Yeshua. If we remember that all sacrifices are called a “korban,” and the purpose for every “korban” is to come near to God, we will better understand that the sin offering was something brought AFTER repentance as an act that allowed the sinner back into closeness and fellowship with God. We could liken it to a modern day situation as follows. A husband realizes that he unintentionally did something that really hurt his wife. The moment he realizes it, he goes to his loved one, apologizes and asks for forgiveness. He repents and makes a decision in his heart he will not do that thing again. His wife graciously forgives him. The husband decides that he wants to do more, in order to show he really meant it, and that he is grateful for his wife’s forgiveness. So the husband goes out and buys a bouquet of flowers which he presents to his wife. The gift of flowers is not what absolved the husband. It was his confession and repentance that gave him forgiveness. The purchase of the flowers was a vehicle the husband used to bring himself and his wife into closeness with one another again. That is part of the function of a sin offering. Now, my guess is that a worshipper of good conscience would bring offerings for intentional sins as well, but the Torah did not prescribe such a sacrifice, and if an offering was brought, it would most certainly be after repentance. Now that we have a better understanding, the “chattat” should really be described as a “purification offering,” whereby after repentance, the person was coming near to God once again. However, this still does not answer one question. If the “chattat” is a purification offering that was brought for removing ceremonial uncleaness of a person, as we discussed above (the woman after childbirth, the leper, and the Nazarite), who or what does the blood of a sin offering purify? Sin and ritual impurity are two different things. A person in a state of ritual impurity has not sinned. We should notice that the blood for the sin offering was not applied to the person who sinned. The priests applied the blood to the altar (in the case of a common man or the king) and to the inner altar and the veil before the Holy of Holies (in the case of the anointed priest or the whole nation on Yom Kippur). It seems to me that the application of the blood for the sin offering must have been for the cleansing of the Sanctuary and the holy things rather than the individual who sinned. This means that somehow, when a person sinned, it must have created a ritual defilement in the Sanctuary. This makes sense. God tells us that sin can “defile the land in which you live, in the midst of which I dwell; for I the LORD am dwelling in the midst of the sons of Israel.” (Numbers 35:34). Evidently, even those sins the people committed inadvertently had some kind of accumulating effect on the Sanctuary, polluting it ritually. If it was allowed to continue to accumulate, the LORD would have to withdraw His presence. To keep God’s Shekinah in His holy house, the people brought sin offerings, and the blood cleansed the Sanctuary from the spiritual stains created by their sins. It is very easy to see how Yeshua is our “purification offering.” He has purified us with His blood. His sacrifice has cleansed us, and made us new creatures. When we accept His sacrifice on our behalf, God makes an exchange, taking our righteousness “which is like filthy rages” and gives us Messiah’s righteousness. We stand purified and clean before God. We ourselves become a purified sanctuary, able to house the indwelling Spirit of God or “Shekinah” in Hebrew. Yeshua is our “sin offering” because God made him “who knew no sin, to be sin [a sin offering] on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:20-21). The book of Hebrews describes Him as a priest who has entered into “the greater and more perfect tabernacle…not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood.” (Hebrews 9:11-12) Like a priest who applied the blood of a sin offering in the sanctuary below, Yeshua as our great High Priest, applied his own blood to the Sanctuary above. 5) The fifth and final “korban” is the “Asham”, which is translated “guilt offering.” Sometimes it is translated as “trespass offering.” It is not all that different from the “chattat” or “sin offering”. The Torah even says in Leviticus 7:7 that they are like one another in that there is one law for them. That is to say, they are basically the same type of sacrifice and the same ritual procedures are prescribed. We could say that the “guilt offering” is a sub-category under the “sin offering.” When looked at closely, these sacrifices are for sins that involve a misuse of God’s property or God’s name. Their purpose is to purify the sanctuary, not the offender. In that case, the idea of “trespass” offering might be a better translation – that is, when someone desecrates or violates God’s property or name, he could be said to be “trespassing” on God’s property. This means the individual who brings an “asham” is bringing a “reparation offering” to repair the damage. This offering, like the others, does not bring salvation. It can’t cleanse the conscience of the guilty party. It was to be brought for reparation AFTER repentance had taken place. So how is this different than the “sin offering”? In the ancient world, people were afraid of committing sacrilege. They believed there could be disastrous consequences for having committed a sacrilege against the gods. The superstitious associated misfortune, calamities or bad luck to an offense committed against a deity of some kind. Obviously the Torah would not advocate superstition! However, it does take the danger of offending God quite seriously. Therefore, the guilt offering functioned as compensation to God for “trespassing” against Him. It assured the individual that he would not suffer any disastrous consequences for his act of sacrilege. There are three types of guilt offerings, which we will not discuss due to time. However, the meaning of Yeshua as our “guilt offering” is clear. I am sure we all agree that we have offended God at some point in our lives. Most of us have probably committed sacrilege more than once. As our “guilt offering”, Messiah paid the debt for our “trespasses” that we could not pay. In summary then, I agree with what Daniel Lancaster writes, “[Yeshua] is our burnt offering, completely dedicated to God. He is our grain offering, the imperishable bread of life broken for us. He is our peace offering, through whom we enjoy fellowship and a shared meal with God at the banquet in the Kingdom. He is our sin offering, purifying the Sanctuary above on our behalf. He is our guilt offering, repaying the debt against God we could not pay.” I don’t know about you, but after learning all this, I really appreciate the redemptive work of my Messiah more than ever! Blessings and Shavua tov! (Have a good week).
Posted on: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 15:21:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015