Lesson

#3
The 5 Great Sacrices, Part 2
Non-Sweet Savor Oerings
(Levi&cus 4: 1 5: 26)

Sacrice, Part 2

In Lesson #2 we examined the approach to God through sacrice, introducing the

Five Great Sacricesthe burnt oering, grain oering, peace oering, sin
oering and guilt oeringand in Lesson #2 we focused on the rst three, the
sweet savor oerings.
Unlike other ancient religions that viewed animal sacrice as the care and feeding
of the god, the ve great sacrices prescribed in Levi&cus depart radically from this
idea. In Levi&cus the ve great sacrices 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 ve great
sacrices as foreshadowing the person and work of Christ. Read through such a
Chris&an interpre&ve lens, the sweet savor oeringsthe burnt oering, grain
oering and peace oeringspeak of the person of Christ, of his oering himself
wholly and completely to God; of his perfect, sinless humanity; and of his being our
peace.
.

Sacrice, Part 2

Unlike the sweet savor oerings of Levi&cus 1: 1 3: 17 which are

spontaneous expressions of gra&tude toward God and are voluntary, the
non-sweet savor oerings of 4: 1 5: 26 address sin, the breach of Gods
Law, and they are mandatory. In the ecology of morality, an individuals
sinseven if they are inadvertentadversely aect 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 oerings: the sin oering
and the guilt oering. As we saw the sweet savor oerings in Lesson #2
illuminate the person of Christ when read through a Chris&an interpreta&ve
lens, so we see the non-sweet savor oerings 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.
Sacrice, Part 2

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

Sacrice, Part 2

The term tradi&onally translated sin

oering renders the Hebrew word hatat.
As a verb hatat means to oend; the same
root in a dierent conjuga&on means to
remove or to cancel. As a noun hatat thus
carries the sense of cancel, or purify, and
many transla&ons (including our Catholic
Study Bible) render hatat as a purica&on
oering.
However, as Robert Alter points out in The
Five Books of Moses (p. 557), although
purica&on oering may be the more
precise transla&on of hatat, something is lost
if the transla&on does not resonate o its
cognate, the verb to oend.
Consequently, we will retain the tradi&onal
transla&on of sin oering, recognizing that
the funcMon of the sin oering is to purify.

Sacrice, Part 2

Why do I need to
know that?

Sacrice, Part 2

Heres why.
Because if the term hatat
carries the basic eect of
canceling-out or
purifying, then we must
ask what is being canceled
out or puried in the sin
oering!
Is it the sinner, or is it
something else?

Sacrice, Part 2

Good point!
I knew there was a
point in there
somewhere!

Sacrice, Part 2

In the ecology of morality,

an individuals sinseven if
they are inadvertent
adversely aect not just the
person commiYng the sin,
but all of ones society and,
indeed, the sanctuary itself:
like a malignant cloud, sin
pollutes and poisons the
very dwelling place of God.

Sacrice, Part 2

According to Levi&cus, if a persons

impurity is physical, only bathing is
required to purify the body; if it is
moral, a remorseful conscience clears
the impurity.
Consequently, the sin oering and the
guilt oering do not focus on purifying
the person making the oering; rather,
the non-sweet savor oerings purify
the sacred space of the sanctuary,
which has been deled by a persons
immoral or illicit behavior.

Sacrice, 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
Wildes 1891 novel of the
same name.
* Jacob Milgrom. LeviMcus (Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries), 3 vols. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998-2006.

And he said . . .

11

Lord Alfred Bosie Douglas, Oscar

Wildes friend and lover, perhaps the
prototype for Dorian Gray.

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
aect his stunning, youthful
beauty; instead, his portrait
hidden awaybecomes 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.

And he said . . .

12

Ivan Albright. Picture of Dorian Gray [detail] (oil on canvas), 1943-1944.

The Art Ins&tute of Chicago.

Sacrice, Part 2

13

The telling clue that the sanctuary is

deled, not the person making the
sacrice, is the des&na&on of the
blood being oered. 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 puried,
and since the oerer must bring the
sacrice, he must in some way be
responsible for the contamina&on.
Sacrice, Part 2

14

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.

Sacrice, Part 2

15

And the sin oering is graduated:

1.

2.

3.

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 oenders sin oering;
If the enMre community inadvertently violates
a prohibi&on, the priest purges the altar of
incense in the Holy Place;
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
oeringsince brazen sinners are barred from
the sanctuaryand he only does so once each
year, on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement.

Sacrice, Part 2

16

Brazen and Unrepented Viola&on

(16: 11-19)
Inadvertant Communal Viola&on
(4: 13-21)

Inadvertant individual Viola&on

(4: 27-35)

Sacrice, Part 2

17

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;

Sacrice, Part 2

18

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;

Sacrice, Part 2

19

If the pollu&on of the

sanctuary is not cleansed
and puried by the blood of
the sin oering, God will
abandon his sanctuary and
his people will meet
Oh, my!
their deserved doom.

Sacrice, Part 2

20

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.

Sacrice, Part 2

21

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
suer along with the guilty?
Doesnt seem
fair to me!

Sacrice, Part 2

22

Thats 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 Wy righteous
people . . . (Genesis 18: 23-24). And so
Abraham began his argument with God, with
God nally 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 suer?
Arer endless debate, God simply bludgeons
Job into silence and Job drops the argument,
content in being dust and ashes (Job 42: 6).
Sacrice, Part 2

23

So, whats the

answer? Why
do innocent
people suer?
I think I know!

Sacrice, Part 2

24

Because there are no

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

Sacrice, Part 2

25

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&ons wealth;
We watch CNN and FOX as fellow Chris&ans are
beheaded, crucied and systema&cally exterminated
then we ip o the TV and go out for dinner;
And the list goes on and on.
Sacrice, Part 2

26

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

There were many innocent civilians

among them.

Sacrice, Part 2

27

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

Sacrice, Part 2

(Sermon 76, c. 1623)

28

The Sin Offering

(4:15:13)

Sacrice, Part 2

29

The Sin Offering applies to 5

categories of people
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

The priests (4: 3-11)

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

The 5 categories reflect degrees of moral

and ethical accountability.

Sacrice, Part 2

30

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

And he said . . .

(James 3: 1)

31

Lets take them one at a time

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

The priests (4: 3-11)

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

Sacrice, Part 2

32

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.

Sacrice, Part 2

33

Lets take them one at a time

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

The priests (4: 3-11)

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

Sacrice, Part 2

34

2. The community (4: 12-21)

When the whole community sins

inadvertentlyeven 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.

Sacrice, Part 2

35

Lets take them one at a time

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

The priests (4: 3-11)

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

Sacrice, Part 2

36

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.

Sacrice, Part 2

37

Lets take them one at a time

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

The priests (4: 3-11)

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

Sacrice, Part 2

38

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.

Sacrice, Part 2

39

Lets take them one at a time

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

The priests (4: 3-11)

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

Sacrice, Part 2

40

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.

Sacrice, Part 2

41

Viewed through a Chris&an

interpreta&ve lens, the sweet savor
oerings foreshadow the person of
Christ, while the non-sweet savor
oerings foreshadow the work of
Christ.
The rst of the non-sweet savor
oerings, the sin oering, pictures
Christ atoning for our sin:
The bodies of the animals whose
blood the high priest brings into the
sanctuary as a sin oering are burned
outside the camp. Therefore, Jesus
also suered outside the gate, to
consecrate the people by his own
blood.


(Hebrews 13: 11-12)
Sacrice, Part 2

42

Or as St. Paul says, God sent his

own Son in the likeness of sinful
esh . . . to be a sin
oering (Romans 8: 3). As the
sin oering is subs&tu&onary in
Levi&cus, so is the sin oering of
Christ subs&tu&onary: The Lord
has laid upon him the guilt of us
all (Isaiah 53: 6).

In the sin oering we see

Christ as the lamb of God
who takes away the sin of
the world.

Sacrice, Part 2

(John 1: 29)

43

Francisco de Zurbaran. Agnus Dei (oil on canvas), 1635-1640.

Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid.

And he said . . .

44

The Guilt Offering

(5:1426)

Sacrice, Part 2

45

Levi&cus 5: 14 tells us that the guilt

oering applies . . .
When a person commits sacrilege by

inadvertently misusing any of the Lords

sacred objects . . ..

Robert Alter translates the verse:

Should a person betray trust and oend
errantly in regard to any of the Lords
sancta . . ..
Sacrilege and betray trust translate the
Hebrew verb maal, used in Numbers 5 in
reference to marital indelity, a theme that
resonates throughout Scripture, as God
views Israel as his bride, and oenses by
Israel against him are indeli&es. Sacred
objects or sancta refer to the sacred
space of the Tabernacle and the objects
with it.
Sacrice, Part 2

46

The Guilt Offering applies to 3

categories of offenses
1. Inadvertent misuse of sacred objects
(5: 14-16);
2. Inadvertent violation of the Lords
prohibitions (5: 17-19);
3. Deception of a neighbor (5: 20-26)

Sacrice, Part 2

47

All three categories are classied as

sacrilege against God, but the 3rd
category makes it clear that an oense
against ones neighbor is rst and
foremost an oense 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 ocers); arranges the
murder of Uriah; and then sacrices Uriahs
men in bawle to cover up Davids original
crime against Uriah and his wife.
In Psalm 51, Davids 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)

Sacrice, Part 2

48

The guilt oering (or repara&on

oering) is the only one of the
ve Great Sacrices that
requires making res&tu&on.
In all cases an unblemished ram is
the guilt oering, and
In all cases the oender must restore
what is misused or taken and pay an
addi&onal 20% of its value.

Sacrice, Part 2

49

Jesus stresses the same principle

in the Sermon on the Mount
when he says:
If you are oering 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
oer your giW.

Sacrice, Part 2

(Mawhew 5: 23-24)

50

I think I understand all of

this. But one thing
puzzles me: all the sins
weve talked about are
inadvertent. What
happens if someone sins
deliberately? Can those
sins be forgiven.
Some&mes I do bad
things
deliberately!

Sacrice, Part 2

51

As Jacob Milgrom points out, for

involuntary sin aam, or remorse is
sucient. 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 sacricial expia&on.
The same holds true in Chris&an
thought. For our sin to be forgiven we
must rst 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.
And he said . . .

52

In Chris&an typology the guilt

oering 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.
Sacrice, Part 2

53

1. How do the non-sweet savor oerings dier

from the sweet-savor oerings?
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 suer because of
the sinful acts of others?
5. Why does God require that res&tu&on be
made for sins we inadvertently commit?
Isnt it enough just to ask God to forgive us?
Sacrice, Part 2

54

Copyright 2015 by William C. Creasy

All rights reserved. No part of this courseaudio, video,

photography, maps, &melines or other mediamay 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.]

Sacrice, Part 2

55