3. sacrifices, part 2

Lesson #3

The 5 Great Sacrifices, Part 2 “Non-‐Sweet Savor Offerings”

(Levi&cus 4: 1 – 5: 26)

Sacrifice, Part 2 1

In Lesson #2 we examined the approach to God through sacrifice, introducing the “Five Great Sacrifices”—the burnt offering, grain offering, peace offering, sin offering and guilt offering—and in Lesson #2 we focused on the first three, the “sweet savor” offerings.

Unlike other ancient religions that viewed animal sacrifice as “the care and feeding of the god,” the five great sacrifices prescribed in Levi&cus depart radically from this idea. In Levi&cus the five great sacrifices are symbolic acts that express a set of moral and ethical values, which in turn provide a mechanism for all Israelites, regardless of wealth or social status, to communicate directly with God and to par&cipate in the spiritual life of the covenant community.

In Lesson #2 we also learned that the early Church Fathers viewed the five great sacrifices as foreshadowing the person and work of Christ. . Read through such a Chris&an interpre&ve lens, the “sweet savor” offerings—the burnt offering, grain offering and peace offering—speak of the person of Christ, of his offering himself wholly and completely to God; of his perfect, sinless humanity; and of his being our peace.

Sacrifice, Part 2 2

Unlike the “sweet savor” offerings of Levi&cus 1: 1 – 3: 17 which are spontaneous expressions of gra&tude toward God and are voluntary, the “non-‐sweet savor” offerings of 4: 1 – 5: 26 address sin, the breach of God’s Law, and they are mandatory. In the ecology of morality, an individual’s sins—even if they are inadvertent—adversely affect not just the person commiYng the sin, but all of society and, indeed, the sanctuary itself: like a malignant cloud, sin pollutes and poisons the very dwelling place of God.

In Lesson #3 we examine the “non-‐sweet savor” offerings: the sin offering and the guilt offering. As we saw the “sweet savor” offerings in Lesson #2 illuminate the person of Christ when read through a Chris&an interpreta&ve lens, so we see the “non-‐sweet savor” offerings in Lesson #3 illuminate the work of Christ, of his taking our sin on himself, and by shedding his blood on the cross “taking away” our sin, enabling us to stand before God pure, righteous and holy.

Sacrifice, Part 2 3

Levi&cus 4: 1 begins:

“The Lord said to Moses: Tell the Israelites: When a person inadvertently does wrong by violaMng any one of the Lord’s prohibiMons . . .”

The phrase “The Lord said to Moses” began the book of Levi&cus (1: 1) and it introduced the three “sweet savor” sacrifices; here in 4: 1 the phrase introduces a new topic: the “non-‐sweet savor” sacrifices: the sin offering and the guilt offering.

Sacrifice, Part 2 4

The term tradi&onally translated “sin offering” renders the Hebrew word hata’t. As a verb hata’t means “to offend”; the same root in a different conjuga&on means “to remove” or “to cancel.” As a noun hata’t thus carries the sense of “cancel,” or “purify,” and many transla&ons (including our Catholic Study Bible) render hata’t as a “purifica&on offering.”

However, as Robert Alter points out in The Five Books of Moses (p. 557), although “purifica&on offering” may be the more precise transla&on of hata’t, something is lost if the transla&on does not resonate off its cognate, the verb “to offend.”

Consequently, we will retain the tradi&onal transla&on of “sin offering,” recognizing that the funcMon of the sin offering is to “purify.”

Sacrifice, Part 2 5

6 Sacrifice, Part 2

Why do I need to know that?

?

Here’s why. Because if the term hata’t carries the basic effect of “canceling-‐out” or “purifying,” then we must ask what is being canceled out or purified in the sin offering!

Is it the sinner, or is it something else?

Sacrifice, Part 2 7

Sacrifice, Part 2

Good point!

8

I knew there was a point in there

somewhere!

In the ecology of morality, an individual’s sins—even if they are inadvertent—adversely affect not just the person commiYng the sin, but all of one’s society and, indeed, the sanctuary itself: like a malignant cloud, sin pollutes and poisons the very dwelling place of God.

Sacrifice, Part 2 9

According to Levi&cus, if a person’s impurity is physical, only bathing is required to purify the body; if it is moral, a remorseful conscience clears the impurity.

Consequently, the sin offering and the guilt offering do not focus on purifying the person making the offering; rather, the “non-‐sweet savor” offerings purify the sacred space of the sanctuary, which has been defiled by a person’s immoral or illicit behavior.

Sacrifice, Part 2 10

Jacob Milgrom,* whose monumental 3-‐volume commentary is the “gold standard” of scholarship on Levi&cus, poe&cally describes this phenomenon as “the priestly Picture of Dorian Gray,” recalling Oscar Wilde’s 1891 novel of the same name.

11 And he said . . .

* Jacob Milgrom. LeviMcus (Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries), 3 vols. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998-‐2006.

In the novel when the virtuous Dorian is granted eternal life he embarks on a course of debauchery and licen&ousness. Oddly, his depravity does not affect his stunning, youthful beauty; instead, his portrait—hidden away—becomes uglier and evermore grotesque. In the same way, sin may not blotch the face of the sinner, but it most certainly blotches the face of the sanctuary.


Lord Alfred “Bosie” Douglas, Oscar Wilde’s friend and lover, perhaps the

prototype for Dorian Gray.

Ivan Albright. Picture of Dorian Gray [detail] (oil on canvas), 1943-‐1944. The Art Ins&tute of Chicago.

13 Sacrifice, Part 2

The telling clue that the sanctuary is defiled, not the person making the sacrifice, is the des&na&on of the blood being offered. It is not smeared on the person; rather, it is smeared on the altar.

As Jacob Milgrom observes, “the act is described by the word kippur, ‘to purge.’” When the text tells us that the blood is daubed on the horns of the altar it indicates that the altar is contaminated and must be purified, and since the offerer must bring the sacrifice, he must in some way be responsible for the contamina&on.



And thus our first principle for the non-sweet savor

offerings— 1.  Blood is the ritual cleanser

that purges the sanctuary of impurities inflicted by the offender. As we read in Hebrews 9: 22— “Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.”

And the sin offering is graduated:

1.   If an individual person inadvertently violates a prohibi&on, the priest purges the outer altar, the bronze altar in the courtyard, with the blood of the offender’s sin offering;

2.   If the enMre community inadvertently violates a prohibi&on, the priest purges the altar of incense in the Holy Place;

3.   If individuals have violated prohibi&ons “with a high hand” (that is, brazenly), the High Priest purges the en&re sanctuary, beginning with the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies and working outward to the bronze altar in the courtyard. The High Priest brings the offering—since brazen sinners are barred from the sanctuary—and he only does so once each year, on Yom Kippur, the “Day of Atonement.”



Inadvertant individual Viola&on (4: 27-‐35)

Inadvertant Communal Viola&on (4: 13-‐21)

Brazen and Unrepented Viola&on (16: 11-‐19)


This graduated impurity leads to our second principle—

1.  Blood is the ritual cleanser that purges the sanctuary of impurities inflicted by the offender;

2.  Sin committed anywhere generates impurity in the sanctuary in proportion to the magnitude of the sin committed;


Which is followed quickly by our third principle—

2. Sin committed anywhere generates impurity in the sanctuary in proportion to the magnitude of the sin committed;

3. God will not dwell in a polluted sanctuary;

If the pollu&on of the sanctuary is not cleansed and purified by the blood of the sin offering, God will abandon his sanctuary and his people will meet their deserved doom.


Oh, my!


Which leads to our fourth principle

3.  God will not dwell in a polluted sanctuary.

4. The community is collectively responsible for both individual and communal sin.

This raises some thorny philosophical issues: If God abandons his polluted sanctuary and the na&on perishes as a result, what about the innocent people who will suffer along with the guilty?


Doesn’t seem fair to me!

That’s an eternal ques&on! • When God decided to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham said to him: “Will you really sweep away the righteous with the wicked? Suppose there were fiWy righteous people . . .” (Genesis 18: 23-‐24). And so Abraham began his argument with God, with God finally agreeing that if there were ten righteous people he would not destroy the ci&es. But in the end, God torches Sodom and Gomorrah, nonetheless.

• The en&re book of Job struggles with the ques&on: “Why do innocent people suffer?” Arer endless debate, God simply bludgeons Job into silence and Job drops the argument, content in being “dust and ashes” (Job 42: 6).


Sacrifice, Part 2

So, what’s the answer? Why do innocent people suffer?

24

I think I know!

Because there are no innocent people!

By allowing evil to flourish, “innocent” people share the blame. They are involuntary sinners, contribu&ng to the pollu&on of the sanctuary.


You want examples? As the 18th-‐century Irish statesman Edmund Burke said: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of

evil is for good men to do nothing.”

•  IBM “inadvertently” aided Nazi Germany by selling it advanced technology for compiling, sor&ng and classifying informa&on, contribu&ng to the death of over 60 million people during World War II; • In 1994 the world stood by and did nothing as 800,000 Rwandans were brutally butchered in less than 100 days during the Rwandan genocide; • In America 1.2 million women have abor&ons each year, 55 million since 1973; • Over 600,000 men, women and children live in homeless shelters or on the streets, while America hosts 442 billionaires worth over 2 trillion dollars, with the richest 10% of Americans controlling 75% of the na&on’s wealth; • We watch CNN and FOX as fellow Chris&ans are beheaded, crucified and systema&cally exterminated—then we flip off the TV and go out for dinner; • And the list goes on and on.


Rembrandt. Jeremiah LamenMng the DestrucMon of Jerusalem (oil on canvas), 1630.

Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.


Living in Jerusalem 626-‐586 B.C., the prophet Jeremiah warned the people over and over to return to God, but they did not. Babylon awacked Jerusalem in 605, 597 and again in 588, resul&ng in a two-‐year siege of the city and its collapse on August 14, 586 B.C. The city and the Temple were destroyed, and those who survived the siege were taken cap&ve to Babylon.

1 Chronicles 9: 1 reads—

“They were taken capMve to Babylon because of their unfaithfulness.”

There were many “innocent civilians” among them.

Anonymous. John Donne as a Young Man (oil on canvas), c. 1595. Na&onal Portrait Gallery, London.


As John Donne, the 16th-‐century English metaphysical poet and cleric, said in his sermon preached “to the Earl of Carlisle and his company”—

“It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God, but to fall out of the hands of the living God is a horror beyond our expression, beyond our imaginaMon.”

(Sermon 76, c. 1623)


The Sin Offering (4:1–5:13)


The Sin Offering applies to 5 categories of people

1.  The priests (4: 3-11) 2.  The community (4: 12-21) 3.  The leaders (4: 22-26) 4.  The general population (4: 27-35) 5.  Special cases (5: 1-13) The 5 categories reflect degrees of moral

and ethical accountability.

And he said . . . 31

Aieeeeeee!

“Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you realize that we will be judged more strictly!”

(James 3: 1)


Let’s take them one at a time

1.  The priests (4: 3-11) 2.  The community (4: 12-21) 3.  The leaders (4: 22-26) 4.  The general population (4: 27-35) 5.  Special cases (5: 1-13)


2. The priests (4: 3-11)

•  When a priest sins he brings guilt on the people (4: 3);

•  The priest offers a bull; •  The blood is sprinkled 7 times toward

the veil in the Holy Place; •  The fat (the best portion) becomes a

burnt offering; •  The hide, head, shanks, inner organs

and dung are burnt outside the camp.


2. The community (4: 12-21)

•  When the whole community sins inadvertently—even without being aware of it (4: 12);

•  The community offers a bull; •  The blood is sprinkled by the priest 7

times toward the veil in the Holy Place;

•  The fat (the best portion) becomes a burnt offering; the rest is burnt outside the camp.


3. The leaders (4: 22-26)

•  When a tribal leader sins inadvertently (4: 3);

•  The leader offers a male goat; •  The blood is sprinkled by the priest

on the bronze altar in the courtyard; •  The fat (the best portion) becomes a

burnt offering; •  The hide, head, shanks, inner organs

and dung are burnt outside the camp.


4. The general population (4: 27-35)

•  When the general population sins inadvertently (4: 27);

•  The person who sins offers a female goat or lamb;

•  The blood is sprinkled by the priest on the bronze altar in the courtyard;

•  The fat (the best portion) becomes a burnt offering;

•  The hide, head, shanks, inner organs and dung are burnt outside the camp.


5. Special Cases (5: 1-13)

•  Refusing to give testimony as a witness (5: 1);

•  Touching something unclean, inadvertently (5: 2);

•  Touching human uncleanness, inadvertently (5: 3);

•  Rashly uttering an oath, inadvertently (5: 4).

•  Offering: lamb, female goat, 2 turtledoves or pigeons, bran flour.

Viewed through a Chris&an interpreta&ve lens, the sweet savor offerings foreshadow the person of Christ, while the non-‐sweet savor offerings foreshadow the work of Christ.

The first of the non-‐sweet savor offerings, the sin offering, pictures Christ atoning for our sin:

“The bodies of the animals whose blood the high priest brings into the sanctuary as a sin offering are burned outside the camp. Therefore, Jesus also suffered outside the gate, to consecrate the people by his own blood.”

(Hebrews 13: 11-‐12)


Or as St. Paul says, God sent “his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh . . . to be a sin offering” (Romans 8: 3). As the sin offering is subs&tu&onary in Levi&cus, so is the sin offering of Christ subs&tu&onary: “The Lord has laid upon him the guilt of us all” (Isaiah 53: 6).

In the sin offering we see Christ as the “lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.”

(John 1: 29)


Francisco de Zurbaran. Agnus Dei (oil on canvas), 1635-‐1640. Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid.

And he said . . . 44


The Guilt Offering (5:14–26)

Levi&cus 5: 14 tells us that the guilt offering applies . . .

“When a person commits sacrilege by inadvertently misusing any of the Lord’s sacred objects . . ..”

Robert Alter translates the verse:

“Should a person betray trust and offend errantly in regard to any of the Lord’s sancta . . ..”

“Sacrilege” and “betray trust” translate the Hebrew verb ma’al, used in Numbers 5 in reference to marital infidelity, a theme that resonates throughout Scripture, as God views Israel as his “bride,” and offenses by Israel against him are “infideli&es.” “Sacred objects” or “sancta” refer to the sacred space of the Tabernacle and the objects with it.



The Guilt Offering applies to 3 categories of offenses

1.  Inadvertent misuse of sacred objects (5: 14-16);

2. Inadvertent violation of the Lord’s prohibitions (5: 17-19);

3. Deception of a neighbor (5: 20-26)

All three categories are classified as sacrilege against God, but the 3rd category makes it clear that an offense against one’s neighbor is first and foremost an offense against God.

We see an excellent example of this principle when David “takes” Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah the HiYte (one of his senior military officers); arranges the murder of Uriah; and then sacrifices Uriah’s men in bawle to cover up David’s original crime against Uriah and his wife.

In Psalm 51, David’s great peniten&al Psalm, he cries out to God:

“Against you, you alone, have I sinned; what is evil in your sight I have done.”

(51: 6)


The guilt offering (or “repara&on offering”) is the only one of the five “Great Sacrifices” that requires making res&tu&on.

• In all cases an unblemished ram is the guilt offering, and

• In all cases the offender must restore what is misused or taken and pay an addi&onal 20% of its value.


Jesus stresses the same principle in the “Sermon on the Mount” when he says:

“If you are offering your giW at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your giW there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your giW.”

(Mawhew 5: 23-‐24)


Sacrifice, Part 2

I think I understand all of this. But one thing

puzzles me: all the sins we’ve talked about are inadvertent. What

happens if someone sins deliberately? Can those

sins be forgiven.

51

Some&mes I do bad things

deliberately!

As Jacob Milgrom points out, for involuntary sin ’ašam, or “remorse” is sufficient. For deliberate sin remorse must be verbalized, the sin ar&culated and responsibility assumed.

The repentance of sinners through remorse and confession reduces inten&onal sin to inadvertence, which is then eligible for sacrificial expia&on.

The same holds true in Chris&an thought. For our sin to be forgiven we must first recognize we have sinned; we must feel remorse for our sin; we must confess our sin; and then we must make res&tu&on to those we have injured by our sin. Then, and only then, can we expect God to forgive us.


In Chris&an typology the guilt offering pictures Christ atoning for the damage caused by our sin. It focuses not on the sin itself, but on its consequences.

Through the death, burial and resurrec&on of Christ, the Lord has restored all that was lost arer the fall, and more: our access to God; our in&mate rela&onship with him; and the assurance of our eternity with him in his divine home, heaven itself.


1.   How do the non-‐sweet savor offerings differ from the sweet-‐savor offerings?

2.   In Levi&cus what do our our inadvertent sins pollute?

3.   Why is a priest or community leader held to a higher level of accountability before God?

4.   Why do innocent people suffer because of the sinful acts of others?

5.   Why does God require that res&tu&on be made for sins we inadvertently commit? Isn’t it enough just to ask God to forgive us?


Copyright © 2015 by William C. Creasy

All rights reserved. No part of this course—audio, video, photography, maps, &melines or other media—may be reproduced or transmiwed in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any informa&on storage or retrieval devices without permission in wri&ng or a licensing agreement from the copyright holder.

[All Tabernacle illustra&ons in these lectures are taken from:

Paul F. Kiene. The Tabernacle of God in the Wilderness of Sinai, trans. by John S, Crandall. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1977. Used by permission.]


3. sacrifices, part 2

Documents