Sin offering The sin offering among the Jews was the sacrifice in which the ideas of propitiation and of atonement for sin were most distinctly marked. The ceremonial of the sin offering is described in Lev 4 and Lev 6. The trespass offering is closely connected with the sin offering in Leviticus, but at the same time clearly distinguished from it, being in some cases offered with it as a distinct part of the same sacrifice; as, for example, in the cleansing of the leper. Lev 14. The distinction of ceremonial clearly indicates a difference in the idea of the two sacrifices. The nature of that difference is still a subject of great controversy. We find that the sin offerings were—
1. Regular.
(a) For the whole people, at the New Moon, Passover, Pentecost, Feast of Trumpets and Feast of Tabernacles, Numb 28:15-29:38. besides the solemn offering of the two goats on the Great Day of Atonement. Lev 16
(b) For the priests and Levites at their consecration, Exod 29:10-14, 36 besides the yearly sin offering (a, bullock) for the high priest on the Great Day of Atonement. Lev 16:2
2. Special.
For any sin of "ignorance" and the like recorded in Lev 4 and Lev 5. It is seen that in the law most of the sins which are not purely ceremonial are called sins of "ignorance," see Heb 9:7 and in Num 15:30 it is expressly said that while such sins call be atoned for by offerings, "the soul that doeth aught presumptuously " (Heb. with a high hand) "shall be cut off from among his people." "His iniquity shall he upon him." Comp. Heb 10:20 But here are sufficient indications that the sins here called "of ignorance" are more strictly those of "negligence" or "frailty" repented of by the unpunished offender, as opposed to those of deliberate and unrepentant sin. It is clear that two classes of sacrifices, although distinct, touch closely upon each other. It is also evident that the sin offering was the only regular and general recognition of sin in the abstract and accordingly was for more solemn and symbolical in it's ceremonial; the trespass offering was confined to special cases, most of which related to the doing of some material damage, either to the holy things or to man. Josephus declares that the sin offering is presented by those "who fall into sin in ignorance." and the trespass offering by "one who has sinned and is conscious of his sin. But has no one to convict him thereof." Without attempting to decide so difficult and so controverted a question, we may draw the following conclusions. First, that the sin offering was for the more solemn and comprehensive of the two sacrifices. Secondly, that the sin offering looked more to the guilt of the sin done, irrespective of its consequences, while the trespass offering looked to the evil consequences of sin, either against the service of God or against man, and to the duty of atonement, as far as atonement was possible. Thirdly, that in the sin offering especially we find symbolized the acknowledgment of sinfulness as inherent in man, and of the need of expiation by sacrifice to renew the broken covenant between man and God. In considering this subject, it must he remembered that the sacrifices of the law had a temporal as well as a spiritual significance and effect. They restored sin offender to his place in the commonwealth of Israel; they were therefore an atonement to the King of Israel for the infringement of his low. --William Smith, Smith's Bible Dictionary
G2378. θυσία thusia; gen. thusias, fem. noun from thuō (G2380), to sacrifice. The act of sacrificing or offering.
(I) The act and rite of sacrificing (Matt. 9:13; 12:7; Heb. 9:26; 10:5, 8 quoted from Ps. 40:6, 7; 11:4); of an expiatory sacrifice for sin (Eph. 5:2; Heb. 5:1; 7:27; 8:3; 9:9, 23; 10:1, 11, 12, 26).
(II) By metonymy, the thing sacrificed, victim, the flesh of victims, part of which was burned on the altar and part given to the priests (Mark 9:49 [cf. Lev. 2:13]; Mark 12:33; Luke 13:1; Acts 7:41, 42; see Lev. 2; 3). In 1 Cor. 10:18, “those who eat of the victims (or animals) sacrificed” (a.t.), as was done by the priests and persons offering the sacrifices (Sept.: Ex. 34:15; Deut. 12:27 [cf. Lev. 8:31; Deut. 12:6, 7]). Of birds as a sin offering (Luke 2:24 [cf. Lev. 12:6]). Metaphorically (1 Pet. 2:5, “spiritual sacrifices” [cf. Ps. 51:19; Rom. 12:1]).
(III) Metaphorically, of service, obedience, praise offered to God, an offering, oblation (Phil. 2:17; 4:18). In Heb. 13:15, 16, “sacrifice of praise” means offering of praise. See Sept.: Ps. 107:22; 116:17 (cf. Ps. 50:23).
(IV) The Levitical system of sacrifices was the typological analogy of redemption by Christ. In the Jewish sacrifices we see an illustration for apostolic forms of teaching regarding redemption. We see the Jewish sacrificial system fulfilled in Jesus Christ’s being sacrificed as the Lamb of God for the purpose of taking away the sin of the world (John 1:29). The sin offering became the ultimate sacrifice. Eventually this type of sacrifice appears to have overshadowed the other great type represented by the peace offerings which assumed that the covenant relationship with Jehovah was undisturbed. The expiatory type constituted the daily sacrifice—the continual burnt offering—up to apostolic times. Although most perfectly embodying the sacrificial idea through its vicarious character, it was not connected with any particular transgression but was maintained as the appropriate means of a sinful people’s approach to a holy God. Essential features were the shedding and sprinkling of blood and the offering up of the entire sacrifice to God and His ministers. It was also accompanied by the laying on of hands. In this type of sacrifice, the utmost importance was attached to the disposition of the victim’s blood: the blood belonged to God by right; the life was in it (cf. Lev. 17:11); and safety for the individual and the nation lay in such sacrifices of blood.
In view of apostolic concepts, it is of great importance to note that such sacrifices—the highest in value of the Levitical system—availed only for sins of ignorance, unwitting transgression of holy things, and the removal of physical uncleanness which implied moral as well as ceremonial disability in drawing near to God.
For willful sins, however, no reconciling sacrifice was provided for Israel (Num. 15:30). The penalty of such sins was death in the form of separation of the individual from Israel. Nevertheless, willful sins were not beyond the reach of forgiveness. That such sinners might approach God through confession and true penitence and meet with His mercy through His grace apart from sacrifice was the evangelical proclamation of the prophets. It was held by later Jewish interpreters that the scapegoat, on the great day of atonement, expiated the sins of all Israelites who had not deliberately put themselves outside its effects by forsaking the religion of their people. This expiation included sins for which the penalty was a cutting off from God’s people or death.
(V) A number of controversies arose in the apostolic church during the transition from the sacrificial system to Christianity. The Lord Jesus recognized the authority of the sacrificial law as practiced in His time by observing it, keeping the Passover and other feasts, worshiping in the temple where sacrifice was the central act, and by commending its observance to others, e.g., the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing (Matt. 8:4 [cf. Mark 1:44]). The Lord constantly favored the prophetic moral view of sacrifice rather than the priestly Levitical view. He quoted Hos. 6:6, “I desired mercy, and not sacrifice” in Matt. 9:13 and 12:7, and commended the judgment that love is more than all burnt offerings (Mark 12:33). He declared that sacrifice is futile in dealing with unrepented sin (Matt. 5:23). He referred to His own death as sacrificial, comparing it especially with the covenant sacrifice with which the Mosaic system was instituted, “My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many unto remission of sins” (a.t. [Matt. 26:28; Luke 22:20 (cf. 1 Cor. 11:25)]). In speaking of the new covenant (kainē (G2537), qualitatively new), the inference is that the old covenant was abrogated, and with it the sacrifices that it had initiated and given historical continuity in Israel.
(VI) We cannot easily determine how long it was before the apostolic church appreciated all the implications of the new covenant with a complete cessation of the sacrifices of the old. The full inferences of the abrogation of the ancient sacrifices are first drawn by the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The records of the apostolic preaching in Acts reveal the primary fact that “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3). The death of Christ was regarded at the inception of the apostolic church as expiatory. It was looked upon as a sacrifice and spoken of in sacrificial terms.
(VII) No direct mention of the sacrifice of Christ is made by James or Jude in view of the fact that such a sacrifice was not within the subject of their treatises.
In the epistles of Peter, the sacrificial references are clear and interesting: “sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 1:2 [cf. Ex. 24:8]); “Ye were not redeemed …, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Pet. 1:18, 19 [cf. Isa. 53:7ff. with its clear echo in 1 Pet. 2:21-25 where the sacrificial idea of vicarious suffering is too obvious to need comment]).
(VIII) In the Pauline references, the contrast between the Jewish and the Christian aspects of the sacrifice is more pronounced. Paul was intimately acquainted with the minute details of the Levitical system. He even definitely associated himself with its observance (Acts 21:26; 24:11, 17f.) despite the difficulty we may have in reconciling his action in the temple to the contrary precept he expressed so clearly (cf. Gal. 4:9). Paul speaks definitely of the death as a sacrifice in Eph. 5:2, “He gave himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for an odor of a sweet smell” (a.t.). In 1 Cor. 5:7, he says, “Our Passover also has been sacrificed, even Christ” (a.t.). The death of Christ as which brought about the reconciliation of man to God (man being an enemy of God due to Adam’s fall), is the same as the blood (haima [G129], blood) of Christ which satisfied the justice of God. Paul presents the blood of Christ as the basis for the benefits conferred upon the believer (Rom. 3:25; 5:9; 1 Cor. 10:16; Eph. 2:13). By the phrase “blood of Christ,” Paul meant Christ’s sacrificial death (cf. Rom. 8:32; Gal. 2:20; Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:20).
(IX) In the Epistle to the Hebrews we have:
(A) The doctrine of salvation wholly in terms of sacrifice. In this epistle, we find the running comparison between the sacrifices of the Levitical ritual and the perfect offering presented by Christ in the sacrifice of Himself. The sacrificial institutions associated with the old covenant are set forth as types and shadows of the heavenly and eternal reality in which the new covenant is established in the blood of Christ. The key word of the epistle and the comparison it elaborates is “better.” The Son whose humanity is perfect, the Mediator of the new and better covenant, is the true High Priest (cf. 8:6-13; 9:15ff.). His constitutive function is to offer sacrifice (8:3). Christ offers Himself, the nature and effect of this perfect sacrifice being contrasted with the sacrifices of the law (8:10-13). The culmination of the contrast is the parallel between the action of the high priest in the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement (Ex. 24:4-8) and Christ entering the heavenly places “through [the occasion of] his own blood [sacrificial death]” (a.t. [Heb. 9:12ff.]). The superiority of Christ’s sacrifice is impressively manifested everywhere. It was also an offering in close dependence upon the love of God, for by the grace of God, Christ tasted death for every man (Heb. 2:9). It was never spoken of as “reconciling” God to man. What emerges from a careful study of the Epistle to the Hebrews is that the Levitical sacrifices could not permanently take away sin; they were rather temporary in their expiatory power (Heb. 10:3). Christ’s sacrifice is final and complete because it is related to the heavenly and eternal realm of reality (Heb. 8:1f.; 9:1, 24; 10:1). Christ has entered into heaven itself with His sacrifice (Heb. 9:24) and obtained eternal salvation for us (Heb. 7:27; 9:12, 15; 10:10), having “through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto God” (a.t. [Heb. 9:14]). It was an offering of a pure and spotless life on our behalf and as our representative. The solidarity of Christ with mankind is confidently stated: “Both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren” (Heb. 2:11). The Levitical sacrifices were perpetually repeated because they had no permanent efficacy (Heb. 9:6; 10:3f.). Christ’s sacrifice is made once for all, perfecting forever them that are sanctified (Heb. 7:27; 9:12, 25f., 28; 10:12, 14). Christ’s sacrifice purged His people’s conscience that they might serve the living God (Heb. 9:14; 10:22), thus dealing with sin efficaciously and in its deepest seat instead of with its accidental expressions as in the limited efficacy of ceremonial sacrifices (Heb. 9:9; 10:3). The sacrifices of the Law opened no way of spiritual access to the holy presence of God (Heb. 9:8); by the blood of Jesus a new and living way was dedicated by which men could draw near to Him with spiritual confidence (Heb. 10:19f.). The basic purpose of the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews is to mark the radical difference between the Christian and the Levitical concepts of sacrifice.
(B) The importance of the blood is stressed in the sacrifice of Christ. In the Levitical system the use of the blood was of supreme importance. Nothing was cleansed without its use (Heb. 9:21f.). The vital moment culminating the sacrifices of the Day of Atonement was when the high priest entered the Holy of Holies bearing the sacrificial blood (Heb. 9:7). To explain that Christ fulfilled the great atoning work signified by this procedure, Hebrews describes Christ’s work in the language of the type saying that Christ’s sacrificial act was accomplished when He entered into the heavenly place “through his own blood” (a.t. [Heb. 9:12ff.]) “to make propitiation for the sins of the people” (a.t. [Heb. 2:17]). Such statements are not intended to teach that Jesus reenacted or copied this procedure in a one-for-one corresponding manner. The altar on which Jesus offered Himself was the cross of Calvary and not a sanctuary in heaven. However, what He accomplished was equivalent to that which was typified in the OT ritual sacrifice made on the Day of Atonement. Therefore the author portrays Christ’s work in the language of OT type. Once for all He offered a sacrifice for sins “when he offered up himself” (Heb. 7:27 [cf. 9:26, 28]). It is clear that the author makes distinct use of the concept of substitution. His blood refers to His death which in turn denotes the laying down of His life. It is the life yielded in death which is the essence of all true sacrifice. Even in the Levitical system the blood constitutes the sacrifice, because the life is in the blood (Lev. 17:11). Christ’s offering of Himself includes more than His dying; it is the willing offering of His life and the perfect ceaseless filial obedience to the will of God (see Heb. 10:8ff.). This offering with which God was well pleased brought humanity into a new relationship with God. It was a positive, ethical, and religious evaluation of Christ’s sacrifice that went beyond its value as merely legal substitution.
(C) The doctrine of the new covenant. The first covenant was not dedicated without blood (Heb. 9:18 [cf. Ex. 24:6, 8]). Sacrificial blood was, for Israel, essentially “the blood of the covenant” (a.t. [Heb. 9:20 (cf. Matt. 26:28)]). The sacrifices of the Mosaic covenant were the sign of the establishment of the Law; the new covenant in Christ’s blood was the sign of its fulfillment, therefore, “unto the remission of sins” (a.t. [Matt. 26:28; John 6:53-7:1, 1 John 1:7]). Jeremiah’s prophecy of the new covenant (Jer. 31:31) is the principal link between the sacrifice of the Law and Christ’s fulfillment which consequently abolished it. This is a covenant under which God lays His laws upon the hearts of men and inscribes them upon their minds, no longer remembering their sins and iniquities (Heb. 10:16ff.; 8:8ff.). “Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin” (Heb. 10:18). A real remission makes all other sacrifices useless. The sacrifice of Christ, “the mediator of a new covenant” (a.t. [Heb. 9:15]), which established the new covenant is the “one offering by which he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified” (a.t. [Heb. 10:14]). The prophetic idea of the value of the sacrificial sufferings of the Righteous Servant is thus restored in close association with the sacrificial ideas which were the current trend of Jewish thought. Henceforth there was no longer room for the sacrifices of the Law (Heb. 10:18). The only sacrifice that retained its permanence for the future was a “sacrifice of praise to God continually, i.e., the fruit of lips which make confession to his name” (a.t. [Heb. 13:15]). See discussion under diathēkē (G1242), covenant or testament.
In John’s gospel, there are definite references to the sacrifice of Christ as the Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29). See in Rev. “stood a Lamb as it had been slain” (Rev. 5:6, 12); those who have “washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” (Rev. 7:14); “They overcame him by the blood of the Lamb” (Rev. 12:11); salvation is ascribed unto “our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb” (Rev. 7:10).
Syn.: sphagē (G4967), slaughter.
Ant.: lutrōsis (G3085), ransoming, redemption; apolutrōsis (G629), deliverance from, redemption; lusis (G3080), a loosening, letting go free.
--William Smith, Smith's Bible Dictionary
The following are Rick Livermore's closing remarks:
The subject of sin is so big that in Systematic Theology classes in Bible Schools and Seminaries, the greek word for sin, Hamartia, is the first portion of the official title of the hamartiology subject, along with other --------ology titles for other things that make up Systematic Theology. I have a Systematic Theology book in my library that has 40 pages to handle the hamartiology subject. The subject is one of the Parts, and within those pages are 7 Chapters. This block quote from Smiths Bible Dictionary is just about "sin offering."
I hope you will consider the study of the topic of "sin offering." that I have made into a block quote and posted to this blog today.
Appendix / Bibliography
The digital book that I have taken and made the block quote is:
William Smith, Smith's Bible Dictionary: Comprising Antiquities, Biography, Geography, Natural History, Archaeology and Literature, (Philadelphia: A.J. Holman & Co., 1901), s.v. “Sin offering,” WORDsearch CROSS e-book.
Also the physical book in the photo included here is:
Smith's Bible Dictionary Publisher: Hendrickson
Author: William Smith
Affiliate marketer links: Affiliate marketer Rick Livermore will earn a commission on the items you buy from faith gateway store. If you would like to offset my expenses of producing all this free content, but you want to pass on buying bible and book reading materials from Faith Gateway store, feel free to give a little something-------Give through PayPal-----Rick Livermore-Webmaster220
Brought to you by Rick Livermore
 
I live in Laguna Niguel California now
a fan of
tubitv.com/category/faith_and_spirituality also a fan of tubitv.com/channels/dovechannel
Thank you for your support for the work I did while I lived in Arizona.
I am currently selling my Arizona home;if you are interested in it. My realtor is:
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/3684-S-Moccasin-Trl_Gilbert_AZ_85297_M29833-19176 |
Posts
