The Trespass Offering (Guilt Offering)

by R.F. Lundwill, Vancouver B.C. | Category: General | Jan 1963

One of the contrasts between the Sin offering and the Trespass offering lies in the fact that the offerer in the Sin offering may offer in accordance to his grade, but the Trespass offering must be according to the estimation in silver by shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary."

There were trespasses in the holy things of the LORD, and there were trespasses against a neighbour. God made a clear distinction between them. A perusal of the conditions prevailing in each case reveals that while the trespass in the holy things of the LORD was sin through ignorance, the trespass in relation to a neighbour could hardly be committed in ignorance. It must also be clear that God provides only for sins through ignorance relative to His things. This point can be clarified by reference to Numbers 15. 29, 30.

"Ye shall have one law for him that doeth ought unwittingly for him that is homeborn among the children of Israel, and for the stranger that sojourneth among them. But the soul that doeth aught with an high hand, whether he be homeborn or a stranger, the same blasphemeth the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people."

Leviticus 7.7 states " As is the sin offering, so is the guilt offering there is one law for them ": therefore this law would apply in both eases concerning presumptuous sins.

We would again state that the offerings primarily were only applicable to God's House, and His collective people. Therefore we would appreciate that judgement relative to the holy things of the LORD would also apply here. It is true that the Sacrifice of Christ is all-embracing, in that it is for (1) all men, (2) the children of God, (8) the people of God. By this we mean that Christ is available to all, and all can turn to God in repentance for sin, and accept the provision God has made in the Person of His Son. But let the reader ponder this possibility, "Would God meet the sinner through grace, as seen in these two offerings, and then purpose that he should wander aimlessly midst a state of confusion?" The answer must emphatically be, No! Therefore it must be reasonable to state that God would hardly provide for anything beyond His House and testimony. The confusion which exists is man-made, and not in accordance with God's purposes.

It cannot be over-emphasized that when holy things are dealt with in Leviticus, God's testimony is in view, and divine authority requires that His standard must be met. God will countenance no changes, omissions or additions man would seek to introduce. How lightly man measures the standard! Man seeks ever to establish his own standard, oblivious to the fact that the standard has eternally been set by God who has pronounced it to be holy. The holy things of the LORD have to do with divine government. In God's house His laws must be obeyed and He will allow no relaxing from holy principles. There is nothing trivial about divine things. Revelation 2, 3 confirm this. Here Christ is seen walking in the midst of seven golden lampstands. The testimony in each case is under review. What would be the result if they disregarded the warning of Christ, who is Son over God's house? The lampstand would be removed, and a testimony for God would come to an end.

When a trespass was committed in the holy things of the LORD, the valuation was to be in accordance with God's estimation "by shekels of silver after the shekel of the sanctuary." Here we have the true measure, God's standard by which He weighs all things. The trespass is weighed, and the value is paid. God can only be satisfied when the standard which He has set is met. Thus we see Christ, who only could meet God's standard. He alone could satisfy God's requirements. How did God view the trespass? What value did He set? We can measure it only by the price which was paid. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Begotten Son." (John 3. 16), "who was delivered up for our trespasses, and was raised for our justification " (Romans 4.25).

There was to be no choice of animal for sacrifice. He must bring a ram without blemish." Here there can be no distinction as to apprehension of Christ, but a strong and mature apprehension. This is what the type of animal would suggest. The value must be set by God, and so must the apprehension. How feeble is even our loftiest appreciation, in contrast to God's appreciation, of His Son, and the efficacy of His atoning work! How trivial to the ears of a true conquering warrior are the praises of the populace, in contrast to hearing the praise from the lips of the king himself! Thus it must be far beyond our comprehension what estimation God Himself saw in Christ's sacrifice on Calvary for our trespasses. God's loss as a result of the fall was so great in His eyes, that only a sacrifice of the highest order could suffice that this communion with man, which was enjoyed prior to the fall, might be restored.

The sacrifice of Christ, according to Romans, is to restore unto man righteousness, not his own, but Christ's. Then afterwards, as in 1 John 1, the matter is one of communion or fellowship. In Romans the act of justification through Christ's death is never repeated, but in 1 John 1 the blood of Christ must be applied time and again to the conscience repeatedly stained by sin, so that fellowship may be renewed.

If a man has sinned in relation to the holy things he is able to make restitution through the grace of God. He not only must make restitution, but he must add a fifth part thereto. Is it not enough that He makes restitution? Once the true appreciation of the spiritual meaning herein dawns upon the soul, then one can understand in a fuller measure the tremendous results of Christ's work on Calvary. God lost, through the fall, communion with the creature of His hand. The restoring of this communion is typified by the Peace Offering. As a result of Calvary this has been restored. What man lost by his fall in Eden has been, through Calvary, far surpassed in gain. This is one meaning of adding a fifth part thereto.

We now turn to Leviticus 6. 2, "If any one sin, and commit a trespass against the LORD, and deal falsely with his neighbour... " Though a matter of trespass against a neighbour, it is to be treated as a trespass against the LORD. David when convicted of his sin in the case of Uriah cried out, "I have sinned against the LORD" (2 Samuel 12.18). Also in Psalm 51.4, "Against Thee, Thee only, have I sinned, and done that which is evil in Thy sight." The sin must be viewed in correct perspective. What actually happens is that it is against the LORD that the sin is committed, and an injury against the neighbour. A sacrifice must be offered, and again a ram without blemish, so that the offering must of necessity be in accordance with God's standard. Man is injured, but the sin underlying the injury can only be forgiven by God. Restitution is an important feature of the Trespass Offering. There is required the addition of the fifth part more thereto. We must distinguish the sacrifice which makes atonement, which finds its answer in Christ, and the restitution which the offerer must make. The latter is a necessary part of the transaction, but atonement is made by blood shedding.

There is a contrast to be noted between the trespass in the holy things and a trespass against a neighbour. In the case of the holy things, a trespass offering was to be offered, and then restitution must be made. However in the case of a neighbour, restitution must first be made ere a sacrifice was to be offered. Here again the fifth part was to be added. The wrong had to be righted, and then through the conscious realization of Christ's atoning work, forgiveness is sought of God on the grounds of the efficacy of that work.

We find that there are five distinct wrongs or injuries which could be committed against a neighbour

1. Denying a trust, if a man lie unto his neighbour in that which was delivered him to keep, or which is worse, loaned to him for his use.

2. Defrauding a partner, if a man lie in fellowship claiming a sole interest in that wherein he has but a joint interest.

3. Denying a manifested wrong, if a man has the effrontery to lie in a thing taken away by robbery or violence, which of course could not be hidden.

4. Deceiving in business, or by false accusation.

5. Keeping what is found, and denying it.

Herein we see the evidence of human weakness. These sins could be committed, sad to say, by God's people. The wrong-doer must first make restitution, and then offer a sacrifice that he may know the forgiveness of God. The spiritual application for today is recorded in Matthew 18.15-22. These words in Christ's ministry deal with the sin which has been committed, and they deal with forgiveness. Not only is restitution expected but forgiveness is also necessary. The desire of God is not only that the wrong should be righted, but that both wronged and wrong-doer should be reconciled. This is referred to in the Sermon on the mount:

"If therefore thou art offering thy gift at the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift" (Matthew 5.28, 24).

There must be reconciliation. God has made provision for both offender and offended.

R.F. Lundwill, Vancouver B.C. | Jan 1963
General