The Sin Offering

Continuing our series on the sacrifices in the Old Testament, this episode of Bible Backdrop looks at the Sin Offering. In many ways, it was different from the other offerings and we look into those differences here. God held people to a high standard when it came to the Sin Offering and it shows in the sacrifices.

If you are enjoying Bible Backdrop, please leave a 5 star rating and review. Also, please tell a friend and have them subscribe. You can also get in touch with the show in the e-mail described in this episode.

Transcript

Hello again everyone and welcome back to another episode of Bible Backdrop! Continuing our series on the sacrifices in the Old Testament, we’re going to look at the Sin Offering as described in Leviticus 4.

Although it was officially called the Sin Offering, this was not for known or repeated sins. This offering was for unknown sins that were later discovered. Unlike the other sacrifices, the instructions were different based on who had to make the offering and it was divided up in this way: Verses 3-12 is for an anointed priest; verses 13-21 is for the whole congregation; verses 22-26 is for a leader; and verses 27-35 is for everyone else. Let’s look at each of these in turn.

First, the sacrifice for an anointed priest. There’s some debate about what this means exactly; was this for any priest or only the High Priest? Most commentaries believe that this was the High Priest only but some also mention that all the priests were anointed at their consecration. One clue to this is verse 3 where it says “if the anointed priest sins so as to bring guilt on the people then let him offer to the Lord…” It seems to make sense that if the sin of the priest brought guilt on the people, then this would be referring to the high priest. However, I could also see how any of the priests would be held to a higher standard and be required to have a more extensive sacrifice.

The sacrifice required for the priest was a bull without defect. As I mentioned in the episode on burnt offerings, bulls were very expensive and important to the owner. They represented the ability to continually grow a herd and which would grow ones wealth and stature. To offer a bull was serious business and represents the higher standards to which the priest was held. 

The bull was taken to the entrance to the tent of meeting and the priest laid his hand on it’s head to symbolize a transferal of the sin to the sacrifice. Then it was killed by slitting it’s throat, the same as all the other offerings. The blood was collected and used in the next step. The priest would go into the tent of meeting, dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle it seven times in front of the veil separating the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies. The priest would also put some blood on the horns of the altar of incense. The rest of the blood would then be poured out at the base of the altar of burnt offering that was in the tabernacle courtyard.

Similar to the Peace Offering, all the fat along with the lobe of the liver and kidneys were offered on the altar of burnt offering to the Lord. Unlike the peace offering, the rest of the sacrifice was not eaten or reserved for anyone else. It was taken outside of the camp to a clean place where the ashes from the altar were usually poured out and then burned with fire. The symbolism is striking. Unlike the burnt offering, where the whole animal was offered to God on the altar, the sin offering was to be done away from the regular sacrifices. The best parts of the bull, the meat and the hide, had to be burned away from the camp. Why? Several reasons. First, God wanted the people to understand that sin was not to be a part of their lives. By taking it outside the camp, the memory of the sin would be eradicated. Second, God did not want the sin offering to pollute the other offerings of gratefulness and thanksgiving. Third, it was a reminder that sin is destructive. If the best part of the bull was destroyed, then people would understand the high cost of sin. Finally, it was prophetic. When Jesus was crucified for our sins, he was taken outside of Jerusalem to become the sacrifice.

In the next section, verses 13-21 talk about the process for when the whole congregation of Israel sins. When would this happen? Well, it’s a little hard to say. It seems that if a law or some sort of legislative decision was agreed to and later found to be contrary to God’s law, then a sin offering would be required. The system of government was very decentralized at this time as the tribes usually governed themselves. During the wanderings, Moses led the people but he was not a king. He could be considered the first judge of Israel as that was something he literally did; almost to his detriment. To help him, he set up a system of judges to help him adjudicate cases. It may be from here that laws and precedents were established that may, eventually, have been found to be contradictory of God’s law. It would be here that the whole nation would have sinned and that atonement was needed. The process here is the same as for a priest with one difference. Instead of the priest laying his hands on the bull, it would be the leaders who, most likely, would be the tribal leaders. Then the same sacrificial process as for a priestly offering would be followed. This is very much done on purpose. The priest was God’s representative to the nation of Israel; the nation of Israel was made up of God’s chosen people and would be his representative to the other nations. Therefore, the sacrifice required and the process of that sacrifice showed that they were held to a higher standard.

Next, verses 22-26 gives instructions for a sacrifice when a ruler has sinned. Like I mentioned earlier, ancient Israel was very decentralized. There was no king or single ruler over the whole nation until Saul was anointed. The term, nasi, could mean anyone who held any kind of political office among the people. This could be judges, tribal leaders, clan leaders or even city leaders. Boaz in the book of Ruth is a good example. He sat in the gates of the city and was probably looked upon as a leader in that area.

When a ruler had to make a sin offering, he was to sacrifice a male goat without blemish. So while a priest and the people as a whole were held to a higher standard and had to offer the most expensive animal, a ruler only had to offer a goat. This was still expensive but not quite the same as a bull. Also, the blood would not be taken into the tent of meeting as for the others. The blood would be put on the horns of the altar of burnt offering with the remainder poured out at the base. Again, this could be symbolic of Jesus death and sacrifice. Jesus bled from both his arms, his feet were nailed together and he had a crown of thorns pushed on his head causing him to bleed from 4 points on his body. The blood almost certainly pooled at the bottom of the cross similar to the blood at the base of the altar. 

Similar to the other sin offerings, the fat was burned on the altar. In a change from the others, though, the priest could eat the meat of a sin offering from a ruler. If the meat was boiled, the vessel it was cooked in was either destroyed (if it was an earthen vessel) or scoured (if it was a bronze vessel). Why was this allowed to be eaten while the others had to be completely burned? There are two reasons that I can think of: First, the priests have no landed inheritance and would need to eat from the sacrifices offered. Second, the offerings for the priests and the whole nation would be very public affairs. God was concerned that the sin would pollute the nation. However, a ruler had a much lower sphere of influence so the personal sacrifice would be enough.

Finally, verses 27-35 discuss what to do for anyone else in the nation. It is similar to what is done for a ruler but in this case the sacrifice would be a female goat or lamb instead of a male. The blood would be put on the horns of the altar and at the base. Also, similar to the sacrifice for a ruler, the meat could be eaten by the priest. Again, God seems to be showing that people in positions of power have the greater responsibility to follow His commandments and thus have the greater sacrifice when they sin. One other note on here is that it had to be an animal sacrifice. Atonement for sin required death and the sacrifice had to cause some pain in this matter. Many of the sacrifices allowed for the poor to offer either birds or even grain which was usually more readily accessible. That was not the case here. Since it had to be a goat or a lamb, these may be harder to come by for the poor but it was still required. Sin is costly and God seems to be making a point in this matter.

On that note, I think we’ll wrap it up here for now. Next episode, we’ll end this series by talking about the guilt offering and how that is different from the sin offering. If you are enjoying Bible Backdrop, please subscribe and leave a 5-star rating and review. Also, word of mouth is still the best way for this podcast to grow, so tell a friend and have them subscribe. If you would like to get in touch with the show, you can e-mail me at BibleBackdrop@gmail.com. Thank you again for listening and have a great week!