Chapter 4

1 The sin offering of ignorance, 3 for the priest, 13 for the congregation, 22 for the ruler, 27 for any of the people.

2. Sin. Sin offerings are first mentioned in connection with the consecration of Aaron and his sons (Ex. 29:14), but they were not at that time commanded for the people in general. The words “sin” and “sin offering” are both translated from the same Hebrew word, chat\t\aХth, a fact that implies a close relationship between the two. “Sin” implied the need of an offering for sin. The bringing of a sin offering implied that sin had been committed. In bringing a “sin offering” to the sanctuary a man was literally bringing the sin represented by it, and for which it was to make atonement. Sin offerings are first mentioned in connection with the erection of the sanctuary and the installation of the priesthood. Previously, burnt offerings alone were in use. The various words used in the Bible to define and describe sin yield the following conceptions:

1. Sin is deviation from a defined standard, a violation of the law of God (1 John 3:4). If we conceive of the law as a straight line to be followed, any deviation from that path would be sin. Such turning aside may be accidental or intentional, but in either case it is sin.

2. Sin is coming short, a failure to reach the goal of perfection. Sin is like an arrow falling short of the target. The archer may have done his best, but lacks strength to bend the bow sufficiently to give the arrow power to reach the target. He comes short. “All have sinned, and come short” (Rom. 3:23).

3. Sin is disobedience. Disobedience is possible only where there is a knowledge of the law and transgression of it. There are different degrees of guilt in disobedience, and God provides for this. But all transgression is serious. The persistently impenitent will eventually commit the sin that is unpardonable.

4. Sin is an offense against God. Man may sin against man, but his first and chief offense is against God. Hence, confession must always first be made to God. The prodigal son had sinned grievously against his father, yet when he returned his first words were, “I have sinned against heaven, and before thee” (Luke 15:18). He stated the matter rightly. Great as were his transgressions against men, his first offense was against God. This is the case in all sin.

Through ignorance. That is, “unwittingly” (RSV), unintentionally, inadvertently, thoughtlessly, or carelessly.

Against any of the commandments. This refers particularly to the Ten Commandments, but includes other commands of God as well.

The entire sanctuary, including its equipment, its priesthood, and its ritual, was concerned with sin. The services revolved about man’s disobedience and need for salvation. Were it not for sin, there would be no need of an altar on which to place the victims; there would be no slaying of animals, no shedding of blood, no ministry of atonement. There would doubtless have been a place where man might meet with God, but the service would be of an altogether different nature.

The evil of sin is not necessarily or only in the thing done. Nor is the same sin committed by different persons equally sinful. Light always brings responsibility, and the identical sin committed by an ignorant savage and by a highly civilized man must be considered and judged in each case from a different point of view. God takes all of this into consideration, and in the chapter before us makes provision for it. Accordingly, there is a certain gradation in the penalties imposed for sins committed by those holding different positions. The one who has light is held more responsible than the one who is in ignorance. In this chapter, four different classes of offenders are considered, and each is treated according to his standing. The sin of a prominent person affects more people than that of one less prominent; hence, it must be dealt with more severely.

3. The priest that is anointed. All priests were anointed, but the high priest only was anointed on the head; hence, by way of pre-eminence, he is here called “the priest that is anointed” (see Ex. 29:7–9; Lev. 8:12, 13). He is designated as “the high priest among his brethren, upon whose head the anointing oil was poured” (Lev. 21:10). Ordinarily he is called simply “the priest.” Only four times in the books of Moses is he called “high priest,” and in each case a literal translation would be “great priest” or “chief priest” (see Lev. 21:10; Num. 35:25, 28).

According to the sin of the people. Rather, “thus bringing guilt on the people” (RSV). The high priest stood for and represented the people (see Lev. 16:15, 16; Zech. 3:1–4). In harmony with this principle the prophets always identified themselves with the sins of the people. Although as God’s messengers they rebuked the people for their transgressions, when they prayed to God they approached Him as if they were one with the people in the sins rebuked. So we find them repeatedly saying, “We have sinned,” not merely “they have sinned”; “we have sinned against the Lord”; “we have sinned against him”; “we have sinned, we have done wickedly” (Neh. 1:6; Isa. 64:5, 7; Jer. 3:25; 8:14; 14:7; Dan. 9:5, 8, 11, 15).

The representative character of the high priest needs to be stressed. He was the representative man, the one who acted for the people in all things pertaining to the sanctuary. And in the high priest the whole priesthood was summed up.

When Adam sinned, “death passed upon all men” (Rom. 5:12), for “by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners” (Rom. 5:19). Adam was the representative man. Christ was likewise the representative man. Adam, the “first man,” was the head of humanity; Christ, the “second man,” the “last Adam,” “the Lord from heaven,” is the head of the new humanity (1 Cor. 15:45–47). “As by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life” and “by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous” (Rom. 5:18, 19). “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Cor. 15:22).

The high priest, being in a special sense a figure of Christ, was the representative man. He stood for all Israel. He carried their burdens and sins. He bore the iniquity of the holy things. He bore the judgment of Israel. When he sinned, Israel sinned. When he entered the sanctuary, he went in on behalf of the people. And when he appeared before God, they appeared. He represented the people; he was the people. When he sinned, the people sinned, and he was required to bring the same sacrifice for his sin as when the whole nation sinned.

A young bullock without blemish. Both male and female animals could be used in sin offerings; but they must be “without blemish.” It was a young bullock the high priest offered for his sin, as for the sin of all the people (Lev. 4:14).

4. Lay his hand. This was the same ceremony as in all animal sacrifices, except where fowls were used. The laying on of the hand denoted not merely the dedication of the animal to God; but as the offerer leaned heavily upon the head of the victim, he identified himself with it, and it became his substitute (see on ch. 1:4).

The laying on of the hand was accompanied by a confession of the sin that had occasioned the bringing of the sacrifice (ch. 5:5). This principle applied to all sacrifices for sin. The act of laying on the hand was therefore significant, because the sinner in confessing his sin and leaning on the victim declared his faith in God, who provided a substitute to bear the penalty for his sin. The bringing of the sacrifice was not the penalty. The penalty was death, and this the animal paid.

6. Sprinkle of the blood. As there was no one higher in rank than the high priest, who could officiate for him, he ministered the blood himself. In the sacrifices previously considered, the blood was sprinkled on the altar of burnt offering in the court or placed upon its horns. But when the anointed priest sinned, the blood was carried into the sanctuary itself. This was doubtless because his sin was considered more serious than that of anyone else, and of more concern to God. The priest dipped his finger in some of the blood and sprinkled it seven times before the veil, “before the Lord.” Also, he put some of the blood upon the horns of the altar of incense, which is also said to be “before the Lord” (v. 7).

It should be noted that the priest did not sprinkle the blood on the veil, but before it. It is also of interest that he used only one finger in sprinkling. Furthermore, this sprinkling was done only when the anointed priest or the whole congregation sinned. We have no record of how often the high priest sinned and brought a bullock as an offering, but it was probably not often. Again, we do not know how often the whole people sinned and had to bring a bullock, but we suppose that this was not often. That the people often sinned individually is evident, but we have few records of national sins, such as are here contemplated. The only definite record we have was when they sinned and danced about the golden calf. True, there were other national apostasies, but as the offering was only to be brought when they repented of their sins, there could not have been many instances.

The sprinkling took place with reference to the law, which was directly behind the veil. However, the blood did not reach the law; the veil intervened. In the daily service the time had not come for the sinner to face the law. That was reserved for the Day of Atonement, which, in type, was the day of judgment for Israel (see on Heb. 10:19, 20).

7. Upon the horns of the altar. Besides sprinkling the blood before the veil, the priest also put some of the blood on the horns of the altar of incense. In doing so he touched each horn in turn, making a mark of blood with his finger, thus registering the fact that sin had been committed and that an offering had been brought. The blood that he placed on the horns was from an animal that bore sin, and hence was sin-laden blood. This necessitated that there should be made “an atonement upon the horns of it once in a year” (Ex. 30:10). The unused portion of the blood was poured out at the bottom of the altar of burnt offering.

8. The fat of the bullock. See on ch. 3:3, 5. There is no mention here of its being “a sweet savour unto the Lord.” The fact that it was permitted on the altar, however, indicates that it was pleasing to God.

12. Without the camp. The whole bullock was carried without the camp and burned in a clean place, not merely to dispose of it, nor because it was considered unclean, for it is distinctly called “most holy” (ch. 6:25). The book of Hebrews attaches a symbolic meaning to the burning of the victim without the camp. Says Paul, “Jesus also … suffered without the gate. Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach” (Heb. 13:12, 13). The burning of the body without the camp was then a type of Christ, crucified outside the city of Jerusalem, “that he might sanctify the people with his own blood” (Heb. 13:12). Some have seen in this the further thought that He died not for the Jews only but for the world. No sacrificial use was made of the body even though it was considered most holy. As it was not burned on the altar, no redemptive value inhered in it. It was therefore not the body that counted in the atonement, for “it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul” (Lev. 17:11).

However, it was not the blood as such that atoned, but the blood shed and applied. No atonement could have been effected in the sacrificial service by having an animal killed and the blood poured out on the ground. It was to be caught in a vessel, after which the priest ministered it by sprinkling and otherwise. It was the sprinkled blood that effected atonement, not the unused portion of the blood later poured out on the ground (see on ch. 4:7). The atonement was made by the blood that was put on the horns of the altar, not by that which was poured out on the ground (Ex. 29:12; Ex. 30:10; Lev. 4:7, 18, 25, 30, 34).

It is unfortunate that Christians stress the “spilt blood,” an expression not found in the Bible, and forget the “sprinkled” blood, which alone effected atonement. The spilt blood was the unused blood, that which was poured out at the bottom of the altar after the atonement was completed. Paul speaks of “the blood of sprinkling” (Heb. 12:24), that is, the blood that was ministered. At the institution of the Passover, Israel was commanded to slay a lamb and strike the blood on the lintel and on the two side posts (Ex. 12:7, 22, 23). God did not promise to save the first-born by virtue of the slaying of the lamb. It was only when the blood was applied that He would “pass over.”

The same principle holds good in all offerings. It is not enough to bring a victim and slay it; the blood must be applied. After His ascension Christ “by his own blood … entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us” (Heb. 9:12), and there as a “high priest, … a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle” (Heb. 8:1–3), He ministers on our behalf. This phase of the ministry of Christ is as necessary to our salvation as was the ministry of the blood of the lamb at the time of the first Passover, and as with all offerings in which blood was shed.

The ministry of the blood on the great Day of Atonement was the high point in the yearly service. The killing of the victim was certainly important—without it there would be no blood to minister—but the climax was reached when the high priest went into the most holy with the blood of the Lord’s goat (see Heb. 9:25). Similarly, Christ “by his own blood … entered in once into the holy place” (Heb. 9:12). His death on Calvary was essential—without it He would have nothing “to offer” (Heb. 8:3)—but without the continuing ministry of the blood in the sanctuary above, the sacrifice on Calvary would be unavailing.

Most Christians neither understand nor appreciate Christ’s ministry as our great High Priest. To be sure, they believe in the shed blood; but they fail to understand that there must be a ministry, or application, of the blood to make it effective. It is time that the attention of the world, and of professed Christians in particular, be called to the work in which Christ is now engaged. Many ask why Christ tarries so long. They know He went away, but they know nothing of His mediatorial work. They have not followed the Lamb, and know not where He now is and what work He is doing. It is our duty and privilege, our appointed task as a people, to restore the old paths (see Isa. 58:12), and to present Christ to the world in His mediatorial capacity as our great High Priest. His work is nearly done, and when it is finished He will come in power and glory.

13. The whole congregation. Individuals might sin often and bring the necessary offerings. But it was seldom that the nation as a whole would sin “through ignorance” (see on vs. 2, 6).

Things which should not be done. This includes all sins, great and small, but refers chiefly to the so-called little sins. It is not the flagrant violation that is contemplated here, but the relatively minor “somewhat against any of the commandments” “which should not be done.” The doing of any of these things incurred guilt, and a sin offering must be brought to the door of the sanctuary.

14. When the sin. This presupposes ignorance that what had been done was sin (see on v. 2). Under such circumstances the “whole congregation” was to bring the same offering as that required of the high priest when he sinned. The bullock was provided by the congregation, inasmuch as all were counted guilty. The elders, selected from among the various tribes, brought the bullock to the place of sacrifice, laid their hands on it, and killed it. Nothing is here said of confession, but this is implied in the laying on of hands. Without confession the presentation of an offering would be unavailing, for there would be no transfer of sin from the sinner to the sacrifice. Furthermore, it is not the form of confession, but the fact, that is acceptable with God.

17. The blood. The ministry of the blood was the same as in the case of a priest who sinned (see v. 7). As the priest used only one finger in performing the ministry with the blood, only a small portion of the blood of the bullock was used.

19. His fat. The ritual with the blood being ended, the priest removed all the fat from the bullock, following the same procedure as in the case when the high priest had sinned (see vs. 6–8).

20. The priest shall make an atonement. In the case of the anointed (high) priest nothing is said of atonement or forgiveness. Doubtless he received pardon, as did others, when he confessed his sins. But because the high priest ministered his own sacrifice it would appear that a man could make his own atonement, and the statement is therefore omitted. But here, where the people are concerned, the priest is to make “atonement for them, and it shall be forgiven them.” The ritual of carrying the bullock outside the camp and burning it in a clean place was the same as when the anointed priest sinned.

22. When a ruler hath sinned. By “ruler” is meant the head of a tribe, or the head of a division of a tribe. Both civil and religious leaders are included—princes (Gen. 17:20), captains (Num. 2:3), chiefs (Num. 3:24, 32), governors (2 Chron. 1:2). The ruler had probably not been aware of his transgression. A ruler would not rank with the anointed (high) priest in his knowledge of the law; hence the offering required of him was of less value than in the case of the high priest.

24. Shall lay his hand. This follows the same pattern as the other offerings, and has the same meaning. In laying his hands upon the victim the sinner identifies himself with it, transfers his sins to it by confession, and presents it as his substitute.

25. The blood. The ministration of the blood of the goat is different from that of the bullock. The priest in this case does not carry the blood into the sanctuary, but catches it in a vessel and proceeds with it to the altar of burnt offering. There he places the blood on the horns of the altar with his finger.

26. Burn all his fat. In all cases, whether of burnt (ch. 1:8), peace (ch. 3:3), or sin offerings (ch. 4:8), the removable fat was burnt on the altar. With this, the priest completed his work on behalf of the ruler who had sinned, and he went away forgiven. There is no instruction here as to what was to be done with the body of the victim. According to ch. 6:26 the flesh was given to the priest, who was to eat it in the holy place in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation.

27. One of the common people. The procedure was the same as in the case of a ruler, with the exception that the common man was to bring a female rather than a male. The female was somewhat lower in the scale of value than the male, and therefore more easily acquired. The ritual of the blood and the disposal of the fat were the same as for rulers who had sinned (vs. 23–26).

31. For a sweet savour. Inasmuch as the fat was always burned on the altar it must have been acceptable to God, for nothing unclean was ever permitted on the altar.

32. A lamb for a sin offering. A lamb was even less expensive than a goat, and for this reason it was expected that a poor man would bring a lamb. The lamb was therefore considered the poor man’s offering. It is significant that Christ is repeatedly spoken of as the Lamb of God. He is the poor man’s sacrifice. The ritual was in all respects the same as that for a goat.

Provision for a graduated scale with regard to the value of the prescribed offerings reflects both the justice and the mercy of God. In the first place, the value of the sacrifice to be brought was determined by the degree of responsibility of the sinner, and in the second, by his ability to provide an offering.

Ellen G. White comments

27-30PP 354