Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 4:13
And if the whole congregation of Israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done [somewhat against] any of the commandments of the LORD [concerning things] which should not be done, and are guilty;
13 21. The Sin-Offering for the congregation, a bullock Congregation … assembly – Each of the Hebrew words signifies the people in a collected body. It does not appear that there is any difference between them in the connection in which they are here used. Lev 4:13-21
If the whole congregation.
., sin.
Responsibility of communities and nations
Israel was taught by this law, as we are, that responsibility attaches not only to each individual person, but also to associations of individuals in their corporate character, as nations, communities, and–we may add–all societies and corporations, whether secular or religious. Never has a generation needed this reminder more than our own. The political and social principles which, since the French Revolution in the end of last century, have been, year by year, more and more generally accepted among the nations of Christendom, are everywhere tending to the avowed or practical denial of this most important truth. It is a maxim ever more and more extensively accepted as almost axiomatic in our modern democratic communities, that religion is wholly a concern of the individual; and that a nation or community, as such, should make no distinction between various religions as false or true, but maintain an absolute neutrality, even between Christianity and idolatry, or theism and atheism. It should take little thought to see that this modern maxim stands in direct opposition to the principle assumed in this law of the sin-offering; namely, that a community or nation is as truly and directly responsible to God as the individual in the nation. But this corporate responsibility the spirit of the age squarely denies. Not that all indeed, in our modern so-called Christian nations have come to this. But no one will deny that this is the mind of the vanguard of nineteenth-century liberalism in religion and politics. Many of our political leaders in all lands make no secret of their views on the subject. A purely secular state is everywhere held up, and that with great plausibility and persuasiveness, as the ideal of political government; the goal to the attainment of which all good citizens should unite their efforts. It is not strange, indeed, to see atheists, agnostics, and others who deny the Christian faith, maintaining this position; but when we hear men who call themselves Christians–in many cases, even Christian ministers–advocating, in one form or another, governmental neutrality in religion, as the only right basis of government, one may well be amazed. Will any one venture to say that this teaching of the law of the sin-offering was only intended, like the offering itself, for the old Hebrews? Is it not rather the constant and most emphatic teaching of the whole Scriptures, that God dealt with all the ancient Gentile nations on the same principle? The history which records the overthrow of those old nations and empires does so, even professedly, for the express purpose of calling the attention of men in all ages to this principle, that God deals with all nations as under obligation to recognise Himself as King of nations, and submit in all things to His authority. So it was in the case of Moab, of Ammon, of Nineveh, and Babylon; in regard to each of which we are told, in so many words, that it was because they refused to recognise this principle of national responsibility to the one true God, which was brought before Israel in this part of the law of the sin-offering, that the Divine judgment came upon them in their utter national overthrow. How awfully plain, again, is the language of the second Psalm on this subject, where it is precisely this national repudiation of the supreme authority of God and of His Christ, so increasingly common in our day, which is named as the ground of the derisive judgment of God, and is made the occasion of exhorting all nations, not merely to belief in God, but also to the obedient recognition of His only-begotten Son, the Messiah, as the only possible means of escaping the future kindling of His wrath. (S. H. Kellogg, D. D.)
Multitude no excuse for offence
Note how a multitude of offenders excuseth no, offence: but if even the whole congregation should sin through ignorance, yet a sin-offering must be offered by them all, and their number yieldeth no excuse. Great was the number of sinners when God sent the flood, but their number defended them not. So in Sodom and Gomorrah the offenders were many. Ten tribes of twelve fell away from God and became idolaters. Broad is the way that leadeth to hell, and many find it, going to hell, though they be many, &c. Secondly, observe with yourself the praise (hid from your eyes) and see the state of many a man and woman do evil. The matter is hid from their eyes in Gods anger, and albeit they lie at the pits brink of destruction, yet they see it not, feel it not, are not troubled with it. Because, indeed, they never sit and take an account of themselves and their works, laying them to the rule of the word: which if they did, conscience would quickly bite and spy, and speak of a misdoing. The godly do this at last, and therefore you see it here in your chapter, a time of knowing to them, as there was a time of hiding. Pray we ever for this grace, that we sleep not in death: I mean in sin, that leadeth to death, but that we may awake and stand up from the dead, and Jesus Christ vouchsafe us light, to amendment of life, and eternal comfort and safety. (Bp. Babington.)
Some difference between the sacrifice of the priest and that of the people
1. It is said when the sin which they have committed is known this was not rehearsed before in the sacrifice of the priest to show that the priests for the most part do sin wittingly, but the people through ignorance.
2. In the other sacrifice the priest alone was to put his hand upon the head of the sacrifice; but here the elders are to lay on their hands both in their own name and of all the people.
3. Here is added Lev 4:20, and the priest shall make atonement for them, which was not expressed before, because the priest before offered sacrifice for his own sin, and so could not be a mediator for himself. Herein the priest interceding for the people was a type of Christ who is the only effectual Intercessor both for sin of priest and people.
4. This congregation here offending may represent the synagogue of the Jews who put Christ to death, crying, Crucify Him; but they did it of ignorance as St. Peter saith: and now I know, brethren, that through ignorance ye did it, and as here a sacrifice is appointed after the people came to the knowledge of their sin, so there St. Peter exhorteth the people to acknowledge and confess their sin, repent and turn, that your sins may be put away; and as here the elders put their hands upon the sacrifice, so the elders, rulers, and governors, had their hand in Christs death. (A. Willet, D. D.)
Verse 13. If the whole congregation of Israel sin] This probably refers to some oversight in acts of religious worship, or to some transgression of the letter of the law, which arose out of the peculiar circumstances in which they were then found, such as the case mentioned 1Sa 14:32, c., where the people, through their long and excessive fatigue in their combat with the Philistines, being faint, flew on the spoil, and took sheep, oxen, and calves, and slew them on the ground, and did eat with the blood and this was partly occasioned by the rash adjuration of Saul, mentioned 1Sa 14:24: Cursed be the man that eateth any food until evening. The sacrifices and rites in this case were the same as those prescribed in the preceding, only here the elders of the congregation, i. e., three of the sanhedrim, according to Maimonides, laid their hands on the head of the victim in the name of all the congregation. The whole congregation; the body of the people, or the greater part of them, their rulers concurring with them. 13-21. if the whole congregation ofIsrael sin through ignoranceIn consequence of some culpableneglect or misapprehension of the law, the people might contractnational guilt, and then national expiation was necessary. The samesacrifice was to be offered as in the former case, but with thisdifference in the ceremonial, that the elders or heads of the tribes,as representing the people and being the principal aggressors inmisleading the congregation, laid their hands on the head of thevictim. The priest then took the blood into the holy place, where,after dipping his finger in it seven times, he sprinkled the dropsseven times before the veil. This done, he returned to the court ofthe priests, and ascending the altar, put some portion upon itshorns; then he poured it out at the foot of the altar. The fat wasthe only part of the animal which was offered on the altar; for thecarcass, with its appurtenances and offals, was carried without thecamp, into the place where the ashes were deposited, and thereconsumed with fire. And if the whole congregation of Israel sin through ignorance,…. That is, all Israel, or the greatest part of them, as Gersom interprets it, through the ignorant teaching of the judges, who by their instruction cause the people to err, and commit sins of ignorance, as Baal Hatturim on the place observes, and Maimonides elsewhere g; wherefore Jarchi, and some others, by the congregation of Israel understand the sanhedrim, or the bench of judges, consisting of seventy one. Ainsworth remarks on the words, that the church may err:
and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly; congregation or church, so that they do not know that it is a sin which they have committed:
and they have done [somewhat against] any of the commandments of the Lord, [concerning things] which should not be done; transgressed negative precepts:
and are guilty; of sin, though as yet they know it not.
g Hilchot Shegagot, c. 12. sect. 1.
Sin of the whole congregation. – This is still further defined, as consisting in the fact that the thing was hid ( )
(Note: In the correct editions has dagesh both here and in Lev 5:2, Lev 5:4, as Delitzsch informs me, according to an old rule in pointing, which required that every consonant which followed a syllable terminating with a guttural should be pointed with dagesh, if the guttural was to be read with a quiescent sheva and not with chateph . This is the case in in Gen 46:29; Exo 14:6, in Psa 10:1, and other words in the critical edition of the Psalter which has been carefully revised by Br according to the Masora, and published with an introduction by Delitzsch. In other passages, such as Psa 9:2, Psa 15:3, etc., the dagesh is introduced to prevent the second letter from being lost in the preceding one through the rapidity of reading. – Ewald’s conjectures and remarks about this “ dagesh, which is found in certain MSS,” is a proof that he was not acquainted with this rule which the Masora recognises.)
from the eyes of the congregation, i.e., that it was a sin which was not known to be such, an act which really violated a commandment of God, though it was not looked upon as sin. Every transgression of a divine command, whether it took place consciously or unconsciously, brought guilt, and demanded a sin-offering for its expiation; and this was to be presented as soon as the sin was known. The sin-offering, which the elders had to offer in the name of the congregation, was to consist of a young ox, and was to be treated like that of the high priest (Lev 4:14-23 compared with Lev 4:3-12), inasmuch as “the whole congregation” included the priesthood, or at any rate was on an equality with the priesthood by virtue of its calling in relation to the Lord. with signifies to incur guilt upon (on the foundation of) sin (Lev 5:5, etc.); it is usually construed with an accusative (Lev 4:3, Lev 4:28; Lev 5:6, Lev 5:10, etc.), or with , to sin with a sin (Lev 4:23; Gen 42:22). The subject of (Lev 4:15) is one of the elders. “ The bullock for a sin-offering: ” sc., the one which the anointed priest offered for his sin, or as it is briefly and clearly designated in Lev 4:21, “the former bullock” (Lev 4:12).
13 And if the whole congregation of Israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done somewhat against any of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which should not be done, and are guilty; 14 When the sin, which they have sinned against it, is known, then the congregation shall offer a young bullock for the sin, and bring him before the tabernacle of the congregation. 15 And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands upon the head of the bullock before the LORD: and the bullock shall be killed before the LORD. 16 And the priest that is anointed shall bring of the bullock’s blood to the tabernacle of the congregation: 17 And the priest shall dip his finger in some of the blood, and sprinkle it seven times before the LORD, even before the vail. 18 And he shall put some of the blood upon the horns of the altar which is before the LORD, that is in the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall pour out all the blood at the bottom of the altar of the burnt offering, which is at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. 19 And he shall take all his fat from him, and burn it upon the altar. 20 And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock for a sin offering, so shall he do with this: and the priest shall make an atonement for them, and it shall be forgiven them. 21 And he shall carry forth the bullock without the camp, and burn him as he burned the first bullock: it is a sin offering for the congregation. This is the law for expiating the guilt of a national sin, by a sin offering. If the leaders of the people, through mistake concerning the law, caused them to err, when the mistake was discovered an offering must be brought, that wrath might not come upon the whole congregation. Observe, 1. It is possible that the church may err, and that her guides may mislead her. It is here supposed that the whole congregation may sin, and sin through ignorance. God will always have a church on earth; but he never said it should be infallible, or perfectly pure from corruption on this side heaven. 2. When a sacrifice was to be offered for the whole congregation, the elders were to lay their hands upon the head of it (three of them at least), as representatives of the people and agents for them. The sin we suppose to have been some common custom, taken up and used by the generality of the people, upon presumption of its being lawful, which afterwards, upon search, appeared to be otherwise. In this case the commonness of the usage received perhaps by tradition from their fathers, and the vulgar opinion of its being lawful, would not so far excuse them from sin but that they must bring a sacrifice to make atonement for it. There are many bad customs and forms of speech which are thought to have no harm in them, and yet may bring guilt and wrath upon a land, which therefore it concerns the elders both to reform and to intercede with God for the pardon of, Joel ii. 16. 3. The blood of this sin-offering, as of the former, was to be sprinkled seven times before the Lord, v. 17. It was not to be poured out there, but sprinkled only; for the cleansing virtue of the blood of Christ was then and still is sufficiently signified and represented by sprinkling, Isa. lii. 15. It was to be sprinkled seven times. Seven is a number of perfection, because when God had made the world in six days he rested the seventh; so this signified the perfect satisfaction Christ made, and the complete cleansing of the souls of the faithful by it; see Heb. x. 14. The blood was likewise to be put upon the horns of the incense-altar, to which there seems to be an allusion in Jer. xvii. 1, where the sin of Judah is said to be graven upon the horns of their altars. If they did not forsake their sins, the putting of the blood of their sin-offerings upon the horns of their altars, instead of taking away their guilt, did but bind it on the faster, perpetuated the remembrance of it, and remained a witness against them. It is likewise alluded to in Rev. ix. 13, where a voice is heard from the four horns of the golden altar; that is, an answer of peace is given to the prayers of the saints, which are acceptable and prevalent only by virtue of the blood of the sin-offering put upon the horns of that altar; compare Rev. viii. 3. 4. When the offering is completed, it is said, atonement is made, and the sin shall be forgiven, v. 20. The promise of remission is founded upon the atonement. It is spoken here of the forgiveness of the sin of the whole congregation, that is, the turning away of those national judgments which the sin deserved. Note, The saving of churches and kingdoms from ruin is owing to the satisfaction and mediation of Christ. Verses 13-21:
The text makes provision for the “Sin Offering” on behalf of the whole congregation. This affirms that a nation may become guilty of national sin, in differing ways:
I. Directly: by laws passed by the legislature, or interpreted by the judiciary. An example: the legalization of abortion, or prostitution, or sodomy.
2. Indirectly: by the society’s condoning of a sin or sins committed in the name of the nation, by its rulers.
In the event of national sin, the provisions for the Sin Offering were the same as for the high priest, except the “elders,” or recognized leaders, were to place their hands on the sacrificial animal
The provision for the Sin Offering on behalf of the “whole congregation” shows that God does require repentance for sin from nations as a whole, and that He will forgive their sin and stay His judgment. The city of Nineveh is an example of this, Jonah chapter 4; see also 2Ch 7:14.
13. And if the whole congregation. The very same sacrifice which was enjoined on the priest is required of the people; since he who went into the sanctuary in the name of all to present all the tribes before God, represented the whole body. It seems indeed that the kind of ignorance here spoken of is different from the former kind; since it was said “if the thing be hid;” yet I think that these infirmities are comprised, in which it often happens that men are blinded for a time. (261) For many do not search into themselves, and therefore slumber in their sins; whereas if they honestly examined their doings, their conscience would straightway smite them. It might, then, happen that the whole people should fail to be aware of their sin, whilst dealing with themselves too gently and indulgently. The meaning therefore is, that although no sense of sin should at first arouse them to repentance, yet, if afterwards they should be awakened so as to begin to acknowledge their crime, God must be propitiated by sacrifices; for otherwise the people might make a cloak for themselves of their error.
(261) “ D’estre comme estourdis pour un temps, et n’y voir goutte;” are, as it were, stupified for a time, and cannot see a wink. — Fr.
2. THE SIN OFFERING FOR THE CONGREGATION 4:1321 13
And if the whole congregation of Israel err, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done any of the things which Jehovah hath commanded not to be done, and are guilty;
14
when the sin wherein they have sinned is known, then the assembly shall offer a young bullock for a sin-offering, and bring it before the tent of meeting.
15
And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands upon the head of the bullock before Jehovah; and the bullock shall be killed before Jehovah.
16
And the anointed priest shall bring of the blood of the bullock to the tent of meeting:
17
and the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle it seven times before Jehovah, before the veil.
18
And he shall put of the blood upon the horns of the altar which is before Jehovah, that is in the tent of meeting; and all the blood shall he pour out at the base of the altar of burnt-offering, which is at the door of the tent of meeting.
19
And all the fat thereof shall he take off from it, and burn it upon the altar.
20
Thus shall he do with the bullock; as he did with the bullock of the sin-offering, so shall he do with this; and the priest shall make atonement for them, and they shall be forgiven.
21
And he shall carry forth the bullock without the camp, and burn it as he burned the first bullock: it is the sin-offering for the assembly.
THOUGHT QUESTIONS 4:1321
63.
Please try to approximate the circumstances in which the whole congregation could sin through ignorance.
64.
Can you cite a biblical example of such a sin?
65.
Why does God consider them guilty even if they do not know they are sinning?
66.
Why are both the sacrifice of the priest and of the whole congregation a young bullock?
67.
In what way are the elders of the congregation involved in this sacrifice? Why?
68.
The ceremony of the application of the blood is the same as with the priest except the promise is made of forgiveness and atonement. Are we not told in the New Testament that such sacrifices could not forgive or make atonement? Explain.
69.
Doesnt it appear strange that after the declaration of forgiveness is made the sacrifice must yet be removed and burned?
PARAPHRASE 4:1321
If the entire nation of Israel sins without realizing it, and does something that Jehovah has said not to do, all the people are guilty. When they realize it, they shall offer a young bull for a sin offering, bringing it to the Tabernacle where the leaders of the nation shall lay their hands upon the animals head and kill it before the Lord. Then the priest shall bring its blood into the Tabernacle, and shall dip his finger in the blood and sprinkle it seven times before the Lord, in front of the veil. Then he shall put blood upon the horns of the altar there in the Tabernacle before the Lord, and all the remainder of the blood shall be poured out at the base of the burnt offering altar, at the entrance to the Tabernacle. All the fat shall be removed and burned upon the altar. He shall follow the same procedure as for a sin offering; in this way the priest shall make atonement for the nation, and everyone will be forgiven. The priest shall then cart the young bull outside the camp and burn it there, just as though it were a sin offering for an individual, only this time it is a sin offering for the entire nation.
COMMENT 4:1321
Lev. 4:13 If we pause and give thought we can recall examples of congregational sin in which it would indeed appear that the majority if not all the people were unaware of the enormity of their sin. Remember the golden calf? or the response of the nation to the report of the twelve spies? Read Hos. 4:6-9 for a commentary on the mutual guilt of people and priest (but most especially the people). People do sin because their teachers fail to teach them. On the other hand so many have failed to make use of the knowledge they have received. The congregation knew in the days of Saul and Samuel that they should not eat of an animal before the blood was drained from it; but out of desperate hunger they fell upon animals and ate them in violation of the law (Cf. 1Sa. 14:33). Somehow the word and law of God slipped from their hearts. What a lesson we see in this for today. We need to give constant heed to the word lest we allow it to slip from our consciousness and we become involved with others in the sin (indeed, we believe such a sin is now being practiced even as in the days of the writer of Heb. 2:1-3).
Shall we consider a little more deeply the nature of this sin as it relates to so many of us today? How is it that we cherish almost unaware some idol to the lust of the flesh?the lust of the eye?or the pride of life? We know it is wrong subconsciously but we are unwilling until rebuked, to bring such a practice into conscious guilt before God. How is it that James and John could be so obviously vindictive when they had been taught otherwise? (Cf. Luk. 9:55) How easy it is to substitute our own selfishness for His will in our life. Is busy-ness for God equal to fellowship with God? If we give our body to be burned but do it without love we have sinned out of ignorance. We are unwitting but responsible. He may contrive to retain the look of greenness when the sap is gone. Even a whole community of believers may be pervaded by some such sin. . . . These secret sins may be keeping God from blessing the whole people, though He blesses individuals. Somewhere amid these sources is to be found the origin of much inefficiency and unprofitableness. Ai cannot be taken because of the accursed thing in the camp. The mariners cannot make out the voyage to Tarshish with Jonah on board. (Bonar)
Lev. 4:14 The largest and most costly of sacrifices is provided for both the high priest and the congregation. The high priest represents the whole assembly and each one is represented in the bullock offered for him; as they are represented in the one for themselves. How costly and large was the propitiation God provided for our sins and the sins of the whole world (1Jn. 2:2).
Lev. 4:15 The elders activity on behalf of the people transferred the guilt of each one to the head of the victim. We remember in almost disbelief that it was the elders of the people of Israel who laid hands upon our Lord and put Him to death. We hear them cry on behalf of all the nation of Israel His blood be upon usas indeed it wasin guilt, and in forgiveness! What amazing love and wisdom that in the same act sin and forgiveness could be joined!
Lev. 4:16-20 The ritual here is identical to that we have already considered in Lev. 4:3-12. The only variation is in Lev. 4:20 where atonement and forgiveness are promised. Such an expression here is equal to what is said in Lev. 4:10 concerning the sacrifice of peace offerings. Peace and confidence in Gods provision is a necessary part of the response of the worshipper. Two important aspects of our Saviors sacrifice for us are missing in the sin offering: (1) the heavenly love seen in the condescension of the One who was made sin for us is missing, thus the deepest motivations for praise and thanksgiving are lost; (2) the need to repeat again and again the same sacrifice indicates the inadequacy of the sacrifice (not the forgiveness).
Lev. 4:21 Imagine the scene oft repeated in the camp of Israel: the congregation assembles for observance of a ceremony in which they are a very real part: the bullock before the tabernaclethe hands of the elders upon its head. They watch as its blood is shed and caught in a bowl to be taken into the holy place. Presently the priest emerges from the door of the tabernacle to walk to the altar of burnt offerings. The blood is thrown at the base of the altarthe fat is burned upon the fire. Then there is a long walk to a clean place. Thus even when peace, forgiveness and atonement has been made there is yet the cry, O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death? Only the forgiven man can catch a true glimpse of the horror of sin. We need to be often led out to that place without the camp and see again the One who suffered there for us (Heb. 13:11-12).
FACT QUESTIONS 4:1321
85.
Give two examples of congregation sinning in which the whole assembly was involved in inadvertent sin.
86.
How are priest and people both involved in sin?
87.
How does 1Sa. 14:33 illustrate this sin?
88.
How does Heb. 2:1-3 relate this sin to us?
89.
Church members today share the guilt of James and John of Luk. 9:55. Discuss.
90.
Whole community of believers are hindered by such secret sinshow?
91.
Why was the most costly of animals offered in the sacrifice for the high priest and for the people?
92.
What a beautiful comparison is made in the action of the elders in relation to the sacrificewhat was it?
93.
What is the one difference in the ritual of Lev. 4:16-20 with Lev. 4:3-12? Why?
94.
Two important aspects of our Saviours sacrifice for us are missing in the sin offering. What are they?
95.
Please read with personal involvement the comment on Lev. 4:21. Express in your own words what Heb. 13:11-12 means to you as related to this text.
(13) And if the whole congregation.As the whole Church, in its corporate body, is no more exempt from human frailty than its highest spiritual chief, the law now prescribes the sin offering for the congregation (Lev. 4:13-21). The case here assumed is that of the whole congregation having ignorantly committed some act which at the time of its committal they believed to be lawful, but which they afterwards discovered to be sinful. The two terms respectively rendered in the Authorised Version by congregation and assembly denote the same body of people, and are used interchangeably, so that the same congregation or assembly which inadvertently committed the sin afterwards recognised it. (Comp. Num. 15:24-26.) An instance of such a national and congregational sin is recorded in 1Sa. 14:32, where we are told that the Israelites, after smiting the Philistines, flew upon the spoil, and took sheep, and oxen, and calves, and slew them on the ground, and the people did eat them with the blood. According to the ancient interpretation, however, which obtained at the time of Christ, the whole congregation of Israel and the assembly here spoken of denote the great Sanhedrin, the representatives of the people, who, through error, might proclaim a decree calculated to mislead the nation, thus accounting for the apparent discrepancy between this passage and Num. 15:22-26.
SIN OF THE CONGREGATION, Lev 4:13-21.
13. Whole congregation sin It is not to be supposed that so great a multitude should each be guilty of the same inadvertent sin, except it be some defect in worship or some deviation from the letter of the law arising out of their peculiar circumstances, as in 1Sa 14:32-35. It is this presumptive sin of the whole congregation of Christian worshippers which renders it eminently appropriate for the Lord’s Prayer, with its petition for forgiveness of debts, to be repeated in every assembly. The sin of the whole congregation was to be expiated in the same way with the sin of the priest, except that the elders, as their representatives, laid their hands upon the victim.
The Purification For Sin Offering For The Whole Congregation ( Lev 4:13-21 ).
This second type of purification for sin offering is to occur when the whole congregation, the congregation as a nation, and thus the whole nation, has sinned. The ‘congregation’ was the gathering of Israel. This ‘gathering’ would take place especially at the regular feasts, but would also occur whenever they were called together. At these gatherings decisions would be made both about the past and the future. Judgments had to be given and future options determined. However, it was always possible that any decisions then made, and the courses that followed, might finally be discovered to be contrary to the covenant. They may by them have unintentionally ‘sinned’. This would include judgments made on certain disputed matters. And God’s anger, His antipathy against sin, would therefore have been aroused. It was then that this act of atonement had to come into play.
Lev 4:13
‘And if the whole congregation of Israel err, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done any of the things which Yahweh has commanded not to be done, and are guilty;’
The idea is that the ‘assembly’, those who represent the whole congregation, has become aware in some way that its decisions and actions have been contrary to Yahweh’s will. It had not been done deliberately, but they have come to recognise how wrong they had been. It has in mind decisions which publicly affect the whole people. They realise that they, or someone acting on behalf of the whole, have done what Yahweh commanded not to be done, and that they are all therefore guilty of breaking the covenant, and that they have done it as the nation as a whole. They recognise that, unless they act to restore it, the covenant has therefore been invalidated and has ceased to be effective. And they are all guilty as though they were one.
As the offering is later said to be the ‘sin offering for the assembly’ (Lev 4:21) this may suggest that ‘the assembly’ represents all the men of Israel, with ‘the congregation’ including the women and children. It may however just be that it means an assembly representing the whole people. Or it may be a synonym for the congregation of Israel. (In fact ‘the congregation’ itself sometimes mean all the mature men of Israel, and sometimes all the people, and sometimes a group representing all the people).
Lev 4:14-15
‘When the sin by which they have sinned is known, then the assembly shall offer a young bull ox for a sin-offering, and bring it before the tent of meeting. And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands on the head of the bull ox before Yahweh; and the bull ox shall be killed before Yahweh.’
The procedure is slightly summarised and is no doubt to follow closely that for the Priest’s sins. Here it is ‘the elders of the congregation’, their main leaders as representatives of the whole assembly, who lay hands on the bull ox. The bull ox represents the whole congregation. One or two of their number will then slay the bull ‘before Yahweh’. The death is drawn to His attention, and it is made clear that they are following His demands. The blood will then be collected by the priest in a basin to be further dealt with.
The ‘elders of the congregation’ are heads of tribes and families, here the main heads of the tribes (compare Exo 3:16; Exo 3:18; Exo 4:29). They were called elders because they were seen as old in wisdom, and usually were so in person, but not necessarily always. The tribal leaders would mainly be so because they were heads of prominent families. But particularly prominent younger men could sometimes be appointed as ‘elders’ as well. It was to these elders that Moses came when he first brought word of deliverance from God. See also Num 11:16-17 for the selection from among them of chosen leaders of the people to act in God’s name as His spokesmen. For the hierarchy see Jos 7:17-18; the tribe, then the sub-tribe, then the wider family, then the family itself, then the individual. Each tribe would have its prince or chieftain, supported by a group of elders, and similarly the sub-tribe whose chief would be an elder in the main group, and himself supported by elders, and so on.
Lev 4:16-18
‘And the anointed priest shall bring of the blood of the bull ox to the tent of meeting, and the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle it seven times before Yahweh, before the veil. And he shall put of the blood on the horns of the altar which is before Yahweh, that is in the tent of meeting; and all the blood shall he pour out at the base of the altar of whole burnt-offering, which is at the door of the tent of meeting.’
The same procedure is followed as for the Priest. The same gravity of offence has been committed which involves both the priest and the whole nation, for the priest was a part of the nation. The seriousness of the priest’s sin lay in that he was the God-chosen representative of the whole nation, here the sin has been the whole nation’s. In both cases therefore the whole covenant has been shattered. The blood is brought within the tent of meeting into the Holy Place. And this ‘blood made holy’ is now sprinkled by means of the priest’s finger seven times before Yahweh within the Holy Place of the tabernacle, before the veil, to demonstrate that all that has to do with the whole congregation has now again been made holy. Not only the people but also the Holy Place had been defiled, for among them had been the Priest and his sons. But that shed blood was the proof of holiness fully restored to the whole through the shedding of blood (Lev 17:11). It completed the cleansing. The covenant was restored. The Priest’s mediating work could go on. The people were still His people.
Lev 4:19-20
‘And all its fat shall he take off from it, and burn it on the altar. Thus shall he do with the bull ox; as he did with the bull ox of the sin-offering, so shall he do with this; and the priest shall make atonement for them, and they shall be forgiven.’
Reference is here made back to the previous example. All is done the same. And the consequence is that atonement is made for them and they are as a nation forgiven. Atonement had not been mentioned in the case of the Priest, for he could not atone for himself, but it had been necessary and could be assumed in the light of this statement here. Atonement must always be made if men are to approach God. But here the Priest can ‘make atonement’ because he is not just acting for himself. He comes as the mediator for the nation.
So in this second example a detail is added which was not mentioned in the first and yet applied to it. We have seen before how in the second example a detail is brought in that was not given in the first example, but still applied (e.g. Lev 1:11). But as we have previously noted, the priest could not have been said to ‘make atonement’ for himself. That was something he could not do.
Note how the greatest detail is still given with regard to the application of the blood. This was of essential importance and sealed the restoration of the covenant.
Lev 4:21
‘And he shall carry forth the bull ox outside the camp, and burn it as he burned the first bull ox; it is the purification for sin offering for the assembly.’
The same treatment of the remains also follows. God’s action and holiness, in response to the death of their representative, has neutralised and atoned for the sin of a whole nation, resulting in the offering being suffused with His holiness. The offering has become excessively holy. It has been taken over by Him. It must therefore be ‘given to God’, to Whom it now belongs exclusively, in a clean place away from the camp, a place which is ‘holy’, and in this case too this would include the hide. It is too holy to belong to anyone but God. No one who was a part of the sin could have a part of it. (At other times the priest could receive the hide because he was holy, but not where he himself had been involved in the sin).
In the same way as the bull ox could atone for the sins of a whole nation, so in Hebrews are we made aware that Jesus’ sacrifice for Himself is sufficient for the sins, not only for a nation but for the whole world, if only they will repent and believe (see also 1Jn 2:2; 1Jn 4:14; Joh 1:29; Joh 3:16; Joh 4:42; 1Ti 4:10). There is no limit to the redeeming power of God.
For the Whole Congregation
v. 13. And if the whole congregation of Israel sin through ignorance, v. 14. when the sin, which they have sinned against it, is known, then the congregation, v. 15. And the elders of the congregation, v. 16. And the priest that is anointed, the high priest, shall bring of the bullock’s blood, v. 17. and the priest shall dip his finger in some of the blood, and sprinkle it seven times before the Lord, even before the veil, v. 18. And he shall put some of the blood up on the horns of the altar which is before the Lord, that is in the Tabernacle of the Congregation, v. 19. And he shall take all his fat from him, and burn it up on the altar.
v. 20. And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock for a sin-offering, v. 21. And he shall carry forth the bullock without the camp and burn him as he burned the first bullock, it is a sin-offering for the congregation, After the law respecting the sin of the priest, comes the provision for the national sin of the people. Reader! do not overlook a sweet improvement here. JESUS’S church will continue in the earth, as long as the sun and moon endureth; but though this is graciously promised, yet it is nowhere said that it shall be without error. It is only holy in the Redeemer’s holiness. Song 1-8.
Lev 4:13 And if the whole congregation of Israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done [somewhat against] any of the commandments of the LORD [concerning things] which should not be done, and are guilty;
Ver. 13. And if the whole congregation. ] Particular congregations, then, may err for a season; though not finally, fundamentally, if they be “the congregation of saints,” Psa 89:5 and not “the congregation of hypocrites,” Job 15:34 the Church malignant.
And they have done somewhat. congregation = assembly. Not the same word as in Lev 4:14.
sin. Hebrew. shagah. See App-44. See 1Sa 14:32.
somewhat, &c, and concerning, &c. These two Ellipses rightly supplied. See App-6.
the whole congregation: This may refer to some oversight in acts of religious worship, or to some transgression of the letter of the law, which arose out of the peculiar circumstances in which they were found, as in the case mentioned in 1Sa 14:32, et seq. The sacrifices and rites in this case were the same as in the preceding; only here the elders laid their hands on the head of the victim, in the name of all the congregation.
through ignorance: Lev 4:1, Lev 4:2, Lev 5:2-5, Lev 5:17, Num 15:24-29, Jos 7:11, Jos 7:24-26, 1Ti 1:13, Heb 10:26-29
and are guilty: Lev 5:2-5, Lev 5:17, Lev 6:4, Ezr 10:19, Hos 5:15, *marg. 1Co 11:27
Reciprocal: Gen 34:7 – thing Lev 4:22 – and done Lev 4:27 – common people Num 15:22 – General 2Ki 16:15 – the king’s burnt 2Ch 29:24 – the sin offering Ezr 6:17 – a sin offering Eze 40:39 – the sin Heb 7:27 – and then Jam 2:11 – Now
Lev 4:13-14. The whole congregation The body of the people, or the greater part of them, their rulers concurring with them. A bullock But if the sin of the congregation was only the omission of some ceremonial duty, a kid of the goats was to be offered, Num 15:24.
Lev 4:13-21. The Sin Offering for the Whole Congregation.The offering is the same as for the priest, but the elders, as acting for the congregation or assembly, are to lay hands on the victim. These elders are not elsewhere mentioned in P. Some of the ritual directions are here omitted (Lev 4:8 f., Lev 4:11), but the significant clause is added that by the offering the people have atonement made for them, and they are forgiven. The formula for sin in Lev 4:13 is a quite general one, and the word used for forgive is not peculiarly ritual in its use; but it is difficult to see what sins could be committed by the congregation as a whole save ritual ones; and this is borne out by the words when (it) is known. Such a sin as that of Achan (Joshua 7), though it involved the whole nation in its consequences, was punished in a very different way. What if such a sin never became known? It was covered on the Day of Atonement. In Lev 5:3, however, the guilt is said to follow on the discovery of the unintentional wrong-doing. Contrast this ritual with that of Num 15:24 ff.
4:13 And if the {f} whole congregation of Israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done [somewhat against] any of the commandments of the LORD [concerning things] which should not be done, and are guilty;
(f) The multitude does not excuse the sin, but if all have sinned, they must all be punished.
ete_me Lev 4:13-14
GRADED RESPONSIBILITY
Lev 4:3; Lev 4:13-14; Lev 4:22-23; Lev 4:27-28
“If the anointed priest shall sin so as to bring guilt on the people; then let him offer for his sin, which he hath sinned, a young bullock without blemish unto the Lord for a sin offering And if the whole congregation of Israel shall err, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done any of the things which the Lord hath commanded not to be done, and are guilty; when the sin wherein they have sinned is known, then the assembly shall offer a young bullock for a sin offering, and bring it before the tent of meeting When a ruler sinneth, and doeth unwittingly any one of all the things which the Lord his God hath commanded not to be done. and is guilty; if his sin, wherein he hath sinned, be made known to him, he shall bring for his oblation a goat, a male without blemish And if any one of the common people sin unwittingly, in doing any of the things which the Lord hath commanded not to be done, and be guilty; if this sin, which he hath sinned, be made known to him, then he shall bring for his oblation a goat, a female without blemish, for his sin which he hath sinned.”
The law concerning the sin offering is given in four sections, of which the last, again, is divided into two parts, separated by the division of the chapter. These four sections respectively treat of-first, the law of the sin offering for the “anointed priest” (Lev 4:3-12); secondly, the law for the offering for the whole congregation (Lev 4:13-21); thirdly, that for a ruler (Lev 4:22-26); and lastly, the law for an offering made by a private person, one of “the common people”. {Lev 4:27-35; Lev 5:1-16} In this last section we have, first, the general law, {Lev 4:27-35} and then are added {Lev 5:1-16} special prescriptions having reference to various circumstances under which a sin offering should be offered by one of the people. Under this last head are mentioned first, as requiring a sin offering, in addition to sins of ignorance or inadvertence, which only were mentioned in the preceding chapter, also sins due to rashness or weakness (Lev 4:1-4): and then are appointed, in the second place, certain variations in the material of the offering, allowed out of regard to the various ability of different offerers (Lev 4:5-16).
In the law as given in chapter 4, it is to be observed that the selection of the victim prescribed is determined by the position of the persons who might have occasion to present the offering.
For the whole congregation, the victim must be a bullock, the most valuable of all; for the high priest, as the highest religious official of the nation, and appointed also to represent them before God, it must also be a bullock. For the civil ruler, the offering must be a he-goat-an offering of a value less than that of the victim ordered for the high priest, but greater than that of those which were prescribed for the common people. For these, a variety of offerings were appointed, according to their several ability. If possible, it must be a female goat or lamb, or, if the worshipper could not bring that, then two turtledoves, or two young pigeons. If too poor to bring even this small offering, then it was appointed that, as a substitute for the bloody, offering, he might bring an offering of fine flour, without oil or frankincense, to be burnt upon the altar.
Evidently, then, the choice of the victim was determined by two considerations: first, the rank of the person who sinned, and, secondly, his ability. As regards the former point, the law as to the victim for the sin offering was this: the higher the theocratic rank of the sinning person might be, the more costly offering he must bring. No one can well miss of perceiving the meaning of this. The guilt of any sin in Gods sight is proportioned to the rank and station of the offender. What truth could be of more practical and personal concern to all than this?
In applying this principle, the law of the sin offering teaches, first, that the guilt of any sin is the heaviest, when it is committed by one who is placed in a position of religious authority. For this graded law is headed by the case of the sin of the anointed priest, that is, the high priest, the highest functionary in the nation.
We read (Lev 4:3): “If the anointed priest shall sin so as to bring guilt on the people, then let him offer for his sin which he hath committed, a young bullock without blemish, unto the Lord, for a sin offering.”
That is, the high priest, although a single individual, if he sin, must bring as large and valuable an offering as is required from the whole congregation. For this law there are two evident reasons. The first is found in the fact that in Israel the high priest represented before God the entire nation. When he sinned it was as if the whole nation sinned in him. So it is said that by his sin he “brings guilt on the people”-a very weighty matter. And this suggests a second reason for the costly offering that was required from him. The consequences of the sin of one in such a high position of religious authority must, in the nature of the case, be much more serious and far-reaching than in the case of any other person.
And here we have another lesson as pertinent to our time as to those days. As the high priest, so, in modern time, the bishop, minister, or elder, is ordained as an officer in matters of religion, to act for and with men in the things of God. For the proper administration of this high trust, how indispensable that such a one shall take heed to maintain unbroken fellowship with God! Any shortcoming here is sure to impair by so much the spiritual value of his own ministrations for the people to whom he ministers. And this evil consequence of any unfaithfulness of his is the more certain to follow, because, of all the members of the community, his example has the widest and most effective influence; in whatever that example be bad or defective, it is sure to do mischief in exact proportion to his exalted station. If then such a one sin, the case is very grave, and his guilt proportionately heavy.
This very momentous fact is brought before us in an impressive way in the New Testament, where, in the epistles to the Seven Churches of Asia {Rev 2:1-29; Rev 3:1-22} it is “the angel of the church,” the presiding officer of the church in each city, who is held responsible for the spiritual state of those committed to his charge. No wonder that the Apostle James wrote: {Jam 3:1} “Be not many teachers, my brethren, knowing that we shall receive heavier judgment.” Well may every true-hearted minister of Christs Church tremble, as here in the law of the sin offering he reads how the sin of the officer of religion may bring guilt, not only on himself, but also “on the whole people”! Well may he cry out with the Apostle Paul: {2Co 2:16} “Who is sufficient for these things?” and, like him, beseech those to whom he ministers, “Brethren, pray for us!”
With the sin of the high priest is ranked that of the congregation, or the collective nation. It is written (Lev 4:13-14): “If the whole congregation of Israel shall err, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done any one of the things which the Lord hath commanded not to be done, and are guilty, then the assembly shall offer a young bullock for a sin offering.”
Thus Israel was taught by this law, as we are, that responsibility attaches not only to each individual person, but also to associations of individuals in their corporate character, as nations, communities, and-we may add-all Societies and Corporations, whether secular or religious. Let us emphasise it to our own consciences, as another of the fundamental lessons of this law: there is individual sin; there is also such a thing as a sin by “the whole congregation.” In other words, God holds nations, communities-in a word, all associations and combinations of men for whatever purpose, no less under obligation in their corporate capacity to keep His law than as individuals, and will count them guilty if they break it, even through ignorance.
Never has a generation needed this reminder more than our own. The political and social principles which, since the French Revolution in the end of the last century, have been, year by year, more and more generally accepted among the nations of Christendom, are everywhere tending to the avowed or practical denial of this most important truth. It is a maxim ever more and more extensively accepted as almost axiomatic in our modern democratic communities, that religion is wholly a concern of the individual; and that a nation or community, as such, should make no distinction between various religions as false or true, but maintain an absolute neutrality, even between Christianity and idolatry, or theism and atheism. It should take little thought to see that this modern maxim stands in direct opposition to the principle assumed in this law of the sin offering; namely, that a community or nation is as truly and directly responsible to God as the individual in the nation. But this corporate responsibility the spirit of the age squarely denies.
Not that all, indeed, in our modern so-called Christian nations have come to this. But no one will deny that this is the mind of the vanguard of nineteenth century liberalism in religion and politics. Many of our political leaders in all lands make no secret of their views on the subject. A purely secular state is everywhere held up, and that with great plausibility and persuasiveness, as the ideal of political government; the goal to the attainment of which all good citizens should unite their efforts. And, indeed, in some parts of Christendom the complete attainment of this evil ideal seems not far away.
It is not strange, indeed, to see atheists, agnostics, and others who deny the Christian faith, maintaining this position; but when we hear men who call themselves Christians-in many cases, even Christian ministers-advocating, in one form or another, governmental neutrality in religion as the only right basis of government, one may well be amazed. For Christians are supposed to accept the Holy Scriptures as the law of faith and of morals, private and public; and where in all the Scripture will anyone find such an attitude of any nation or people mentioned, but to be condemned and threatened with the judgment of God?
Will anyone venture to say that this teaching of the law of the sin offering was only intended, like the offering itself, for the old Hebrews? Is it not rather the constant and most emphatic teaching of the whole Scriptures, that God dealt with all the ancient Gentile nations on the same principle? The history which records the overthrow of those old nations and empires does so, even professedly, for the express purpose of calling the attention of men in all ages to this principle, that God deals with all nations as under obligations to recognise Himself as King of nations, and submit in all things to His authority. So it was in the case of Moab, of Ammon, of Nineveh, and Babylon; in regard to each of which we are told, in so many words, that it was because they refused to recognise this principle of national responsibility to the one true God, which was brought before Israel in this part of the law of the sin offering, that the Divine judgment came upon them in their utter national overthrow. How awfully plain, again, is the language of the second Psalm on this same subject, where it is precisely this national repudiation of the supreme authority of God and of His Christ, so increasingly common in our day, which is named as the ground of the derisive judgment of God, and is made the occasion of exhorting all nations, not merely to belief in God, but also to the obedient recognition of His only-begotten Son, the Messiah, as the only possible means of escaping the future kindling of His wrath.
No graver sign of our times could perhaps be named than just this universal tendency in Christendom, in one way or another, to repudiate that corporate responsibility to God which is assumed as the basis of this part of the law of the sin offering. There can be no worse omen for the future of an individual than the denial of his obligations to God and to His Son, our Saviour; and there can be no worse sign for the future of Christendom, or of any nation in Christendom, than the partial or entire denial of national obligation to God and to His Christ. What it shall mean in the end, what is the future toward which these popular modern principles are conducting the nations, is revealed in Scripture with startling clearness, in the warning that the world is yet to see one who shall be in a peculiar and eminent sense “the Antichrist”; {1Jn 2:18} who shall deny both the Father and Son, and be “the Lawless One,” and the “Man of Sin,” in that He shall “set Himself forth as God”; {2Th 2:3-8} to whom authority will be given “over every tribe, and people, and tongue, and nation.” {Rev 13:7}
The nation, then, as such, is held responsible to God! So stands the law. And, therefore, in Israel, if the nation should sin, it was ordained that they also, like the high priest, should bring a bullock for a sin offering, the most costly victim that was ever prescribed. This was so ordained, no doubt, in part because of Israels own priestly station as a “kingdom of priests and a holy nation,” exalted to a position of peculiar dignity and privilege before God, that they might mediate the blessings of redemption to all nations. It was because of this fact that, if they sinned, their guilt was peculiarly heavy.
The principle, however, is of present day application. Privilege is the measure of responsibility, no less now than then, for nations as well as for individuals. Thus national sin, on the part of the British or American nation, or indeed with any of the so-called Christian nations, is certainly judged by God to be a much more evil thing than the same sin if committed, for example, by the Chinese or Turkish nation, who have had no such degree of Gospel light and knowledge.
And the law in this case evidently also implies that sin is aggravated in proportion to its universality. It is bad, for example, if in a community one man commit adultery, forsaking his own wife; but it argues a condition of things far worse when the violation of the marriage relation becomes common; when the question can actually be held open for discussion whether marriage, as a permanent union between one man and one woman, be not “a failure,” as debated not long ago in a leading London paper; and when, as in many of the United States of America and other countries of modern Christendom, laws are enacted for the express purpose of legalising the violation of Christs law of marriage, and thus shielding adulterers and adulteresses from the condign punishment their crime deserves. It is bad, again, when individuals in a State teach doctrines subversive of morality; but it evidently argues a far deeper depravation of morals when a whole community unite in accepting, endowing, and upholding such in their work.
Next in order comes the case of the civil ruler. For him it was ordered: “When a ruler sinneth, and doeth unwittingly any of the things which the Lord his God hath commanded not to be done, and is guilty: if his sin, wherein he hath sinned, be made known to him, he shall bring for his oblation a goat, a male without blemish” (Lev 4:22). Thus, the ruler was to bring a victim of less value than the high priest or the collective congregation; but it must still be of more value than that of a private person; for his responsibility, if less than that of the officer of religion, is distinctly greater than that of a man in private life.
And here is a lesson for modern politicians, no less than for rulers of the olden time in Israel. While there are many in our Parliaments and like governing bodies in Christendom who cast their every vote with the fear of God before their eyes, yet, if there be any truth in the general opinion of men upon this subject, there are many in such places who, in their voting, have before their eyes the fear of party more than the fear of God; and who, when a question comes before them, first of all consider, not what would the law of absolute righteousness, the law of God, require, but how will a vote, one way or the other, in this matter, be likely to affect their party? Such certainly need to be emphatically reminded of this part of the law of the sin offering, which held the civil ruler specially responsible to God for the execution of his trust. For so it is still; God has not abdicated His throne in favour of the people, nor will He waive His crown rights out of deference to the political necessities of a party.
Nor is it only those who sin in this particular way who need the reminder of their personal responsibility to God. All need it who either are or may be called to places of greater or less governmental responsibility; and it is those who are the most worthy of such trust who will be the first to acknowledge their need of this warning. For in all times those who have been lifted to positions of political power have been under peculiar temptation to forget God, and become reckless of their obligation to Him as His ministers. But under the conditions of modern life, in many countries of Christendom, this is true as perhaps never before. For now it has come to pass that, in most modern communities, those who make and execute laws hold their tenure of office at the pleasure of a motley army of voters, Protestants and Romanists, Jews, atheists, and what not, a large part of whom care not the least for the will of God in civil government, as revealed in Holy Scripture. Under such conditions, the place of the civil ruler becomes one of such special trial and temptation that we do well to remember in our intercessions, with peculiar sympathy, all who in such positions are seeking to serve supremely, not their party, but their God, and so best serve their country. It is no wonder that the temptation too often to many becomes overpowering, to silence conscience with plausible sophistries, and to use their office to carry out in legislation, instead of the will of God, the will of the people, or rather, of that particular party which put them in power.
Yet the great principle affirmed in this law of the sin offering stands, and will stand forever, and to it all will do well to take heed; namely, that God will hold the civil ruler responsible, and more heavily responsible than any private person, for any sin he may commit, and especially for any violation of law in any matter committed to his trust. And there is abundant reason for this. For the powers that be are ordained of God, and in His providence are placed in authority; not as the modern notion is, for the purpose of executing the will of their constituents, whatever that will may be, but rather the unchangeable will of the Most Holy God, the Ruler of all nations, so far as revealed, concerning the civil and social relations of men. Nor must it be forgotten that this eminent responsibility attaches to them, not only in their official acts, but in all their acts as individuals. No distinction is made as to the sin for which the ruler must bring his sin offering, whether public and official, or private and personal. Of whatsoever kind the sin may be, if committed by a ruler, God holds him specially responsible, as being a ruler; and reckons the guilt of that sin, even if a private offence, to be heavier than if it had been committed by one of the common people. And this, for the evident reason that, as in the case of the high priest, his exalted position gives his example double influence and effect. Thus, in all ages and all lands, a corrupt king or nobility have made a corrupt court; and a corrupt court or corrupt legislators are sure to demoralise all the lower ranks of society. But however it may be under the governments of men, under the equitable government of the Most Holy God, high station can give no immunity to sin. And in the day to come, when the Great Assize is set, there will be many who in this world stood high in authority, who will learn, in the tremendous decisions of that day, if not before, that a just God reckoned the guilt of their sins and crimes in exact proportion to their rank and station.
Last of all, in this chapter, comes the law of the sin offering for one of the common people, of which the first part is given Lev 4:27-35. The victim which is appointed for those who are best able to give, a female goat, is yet of less value than those ordered in the cases before given; for the responsibility and guilt in the case of such is less. The first prescription for a sin offering by one of the common people is introduced by these words: -” If any one of the common people sin unwittingly, in doing any of the things which the Lord hath commanded not to be done, and be guilty; if his sin, which he hath sinned, be made known to him, then he shall bring for his oblation a goat, a female without blemish, for his sin which he hath sinned” (Lev 4:27-28).
In case of his inability to bring so much as this, offerings of lesser value are authorised in the section following, {Lev 5:5-13} to which we shall attend hereafter.
Meanwhile it is suggestive to observe that this part of the law is expanded more fully than any other part of the law of the sin offering. We are hereby reminded that if none are so high as to he above the reach of the judgment of God, but are held in that proportion strictly responsible for their sin; so, on the other hand, none are of station so low that their sins shall therefore be overlooked. The common people, in all lands, are the great majority of the population; but no one is to imagine that, because he is a single individual, of no importance in a multitude, he shall therefore, if he sin, escape the Divine eye, as it were, in a crowd. Not so. We may be of the very lowest social station; the provision in Lev 5:11 regards the case of such as might be so poor as that they could not even buy two doves. Men may judge the doings of such poor folk of little or no consequence; but not so God. With Him is no respect of persons, either of rich or poor. From all alike, from the anointed high priest, who ministers in the Holy of Holies, down to the common people, and among these, again, from the highest down to the very lowest, poorest, and meanest in rank, is demanded, even for a sin of ignorance, a sin offering for atonement.
What a solemn lesson we have herein concerning the character of God! His omniscience, which not only notes the sin of those who are in some conspicuous position, but also each individual sin of the lowest of the people! His absolute equity, exactly and accurately grading responsibility for sin committed, in each case, according to the rank and influence of him who commits it! His infinite holiness, which cannot pass by without expiation even the transient act or word of rash hands or lips, not even the sin not known as sin by the sinner; a holiness which, in a word, unchangeably and unalterably requires from every human being, nothing less than absolute moral perfection like His own!
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
TEXT 4:1321
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary