| Back to Home Page | Back to Book Index
|
Leviticus
Chapter Five
Leviticus 5
Chapter Contents
Concerning various trespasses. (1-13) Concerning
trespasses against the Lord. (14-19)
Commentary on Leviticus 5:1-13
The offences here noticed are
1. A man's concealing the
truth
when he was sworn as a witness to speak the truth
the whole truth
and
nothing but the truth. If
in such a case
for fear of offending one that has
been his friend
or may be his enemy
a man refuses to give evidence
or gives
it but in part
he shall bear his iniquity. And that is a heavy burden
which
if some course be not taken to get it removed
will sink a man to hell. Let all
that are called at any time to be witnesses
think of this law
and be free and
open in their evidence
and take heed of prevaricating. An oath of the Lord is
a sacred thing
not to be trifled with. 2. A man's touching any thing that was
ceremonially unclean. Though his touching the unclean thing only made him
ceremonially defiled
yet neglecting to wash himself according to the law
was
either carelessness or contempt
and contracted moral guilt. As soon as God
by
his Spirit
convinces our consciences of any sin or duty
we must follow the conviction
as not ashamed to own our former mistake. 3. Rash swearing
that a man will do
or not do such a thing. As if the performance of his oath afterward prove
unlawful
or what cannot be done. Wisdom and watchfulness beforehand would
prevent these difficulties. In these cases the offender must confess his sin
and bring his offering; but the offering was not accepted
unless accompanied
with confession and humble prayer for pardon. The confession must be
particular; that he hath sinned in that thing. Deceit lies in generals; many
will own they have sinned
for that all must own; but their sins in any one
particular they are unwilling to allow. The way to be assured of pardon
and
armed against sin for the future
is to confess the exact truth. If any were
very poor
they might bring some flour
and that should be accepted. Thus the
expense of the sin-offering was brought lower than any other
to teach that no
man's poverty shall ever bar the way of his pardon. If the sinner brought two
doves
one was to be offered for a sin-offering
and the other for a
burnt-offering. We must first see that our peace be made with God
and then we
may expect that our services for his glory will be accepted by him. To show the
loathsomeness of sin
the flour
when offered
must not be made grateful to the
taste by oil
or to the smell by frankincense. God
by these sacrifices
spoke
comfort to those who had offended
that they might not despair
nor pine away
in their sins. Likewise caution not to offend any more
remembering how
expensive and troublesome it was to make atonement.
Commentary on Leviticus 5:14-19
Here are offerings to atone for trespasses against a
neighbour. If a man put to his own use unwittingly
any thing dedicated to God
he was to bring this sacrifice. We are to be jealous over ourselves
to ask
pardon for the sin
and make satisfaction for the wrong
which we do but
suspect ourselves guilty of. The law of God is so very broad
the occasions of
sin in this guilty of. The law of God is so very broad
the occasions of sin in
this world are so numerous
and we are so prone to evil
that we need to fear
always
and to pray always
that we may be kept from sin. Also we should look
before us at every step. The true Christian daily pleads guilty before God
and
seeks forgiveness through the blood of Christ. And the gospel salvation is so
free
that the poorest is not shut out; and so full
that the most burdened
conscience may find relief from it. Yet the evil of sin is so displayed as to
cause every pardoned sinner to abhor and dread it.
── Matthew Henry《Concise Commentary on Leviticus》
Leviticus 5
Verse 1
[1] And
if a soul sin
and hear the voice of swearing
and is a witness
whether he
hath seen or known of it; if he do not utter it
then he shall bear his
iniquity.
And hear —
And for that is
as that particle is often used. For this declares in
particular what the sin was. Or
namely
that of cursing
or blasphemy
or
execration
as the word commonly signifies
and that either against one's
neighbour
or against God. This may seem to be principally intended here
because the crime spoken of is of so high a nature
that he who heard it
was
obliged to reveal it
and prosecute the guilty.
He hath seen —
Been present when it was said.
Or known — By
sufficient information from others.
His iniquity —
That is
the punishment of it; so that word is oft used
as Genesis 19:15; Numbers 18:1.
Verse 2
[2] Or if a soul touch any unclean thing
whether it be a carcase of an
unclean beast
or a carcase of unclean cattle
or the carcase of unclean
creeping things
and if it be hidden from him; he also shall be unclean
and
guilty.
If it be hidden from him — If he do it unawares
yet that would not excuse him
because he should
have been more circumspect to avoid all unclean things. Hereby God designed to
awaken men to watchfulness against
and repentance for
their unknown
or
unobserved sins.
He shall be clean — Not
morally
for the conscience was not directly polluted by these things
but
ceremonially.
Verse 3
[3] Or
if he touch the uncleanness of man
whatsoever uncleanness it be that a man
shall be defiled withal
and it be hid from him; when he knoweth of it
then he
shall be guilty.
When he knoweth — As
soon as he knoweth it
he must not delay to make his peace with God.
Otherwise he shall be guilty — For his violation and contempt of God's authority and command.
Verse 4
[4] Or
if a soul swear
pronouncing with his lips to do evil
or to do good
whatsoever it be that a man shall pronounce with an oath
and it be hid from
him; when he knoweth of it
then he shall be guilty in one of these.
If a soul swear —
Rashly
without consideration either of God's law
or his own power or right
as David did
1 Samuel 25:22.
To do evil — To
himself
to punish himself either in his body
or estate
or something else
which is dear to him. Or rather to his neighbour.
And it be hid from him — That is
he did not know
or not consider
that what he swore to do
was
or would be impossible
or unlawful: When he discovers it to be so
either by
his own consideration
or by information from others
whether it was good or
evil which he swore to do.
Verse 5
[5] And it shall be
when he shall be guilty in one of these things
that he
shall confess that he hath sinned in that thing:
In one of these things — In one of the three forementioned cases
either by sinful silence
or by
an unclean touch
or by rash swearing.
He shall confess —
Before the Lord in the place of public worship. And this confession is not to
be restrained to the present case
but by a parity of reason
and comparing of
other scriptures
to be extended to other sacrifices for sin
to which this was
a constant companion.
Verse 6
[6] And
he shall bring his trespass offering unto the LORD for his sin which he hath
sinned
a female from the flock
a lamb or a kid of the goats
for a sin
offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his sin.
His trespass-offering — But how comes confession and a sacrifice to be necessary for him that
touched an unclean thing
when such persons were cleansed with simple washing
as appears from Leviticus 11:25
28
32
40
43
and Numbers 19:7
8
10
19? This place speaks of him
that being so unclean did come into the tabernacle
as may be gathered by
comparing this place with Numbers 19:13
which if any man did
knowing
himself to be unclean
which was the case there
he was to be cut off for it;
and if he did it ignorantly
which is the case here
he was upon discovery of
it to offer this sacrifice.
Verse 7
[7] And
if he be not able to bring a lamb
then he shall bring for his trespass
which
he hath committed
two turtledoves
or two young pigeons
unto the LORD; one
for a sin offering
and the other for a burnt offering.
Not able —
Through poverty. And this exception was allowed also in other sin-offerings.
For a sin-offering —
Which was for that particular sin
and therefore offered first: before the
burnt-offering
which was for sins in general; to teach us not to rest in
general confessions and repentance
but distinctly and particularly
as far as
we can
to search out
and confess
and loath
and leave our particular sins
without which God will not accept our other religious services.
Verse 9
[9] And
he shall sprinkle of the blood of the sin offering upon the side of the altar;
and the rest of the blood shall be wrung out at the bottom of the altar: it is
a sin offering.
It is a sin-offering — This is added as the reason why its blood was so sprinkled and spilt.
Verse 10
[10] And
he shall offer the second for a burnt offering
according to the manner: and
the priest shall make an atonement for him for his sin which he hath sinned
and it shall be forgiven him.
According to the manner — Or order appointed by God.
The priest shall make an atonement — Either declaratively
he shall pronounce him to be pardoned; or
typically
with respect to Christ.
Verse 11
[11] But
if he be not able to bring two turtledoves
or two young pigeons
then he that
sinned shall bring for his offering the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour
for a sin offering; he shall put no oil upon it
neither shall he put any
frankincense thereon: for it is a sin offering.
The tenth part of an ephah — About six pints.
He shall put no oil
neither frankincense — Either to distinguish these from the meal-offerings
Leviticus 2:1
or as a fit expression of their
sorrow for their sins
in the sense whereof they were to abstain from things
pleasant; or to signify that by his sins he deserved to be utterly deprived
both of the oil of gladness
the gifts
graces and comforts of the Holy Ghost;
and of God's gracious acceptance of his prayers and sacrifices
which is
signified by incense
Psalms 141:2.
Verse 13
[13] And
the priest shall make an atonement for him as touching his sin that he hath
sinned in one of these
and it shall be forgiven him: and the remnant shall be
the priest's
as a meat offering.
As a meal offering — As
it was in the meal-offering
where all
except one handful
fell to the share
of the priests. And this is the rather mentioned here
because in the foregoing
sacrifices
Leviticus 4:3
etc. Leviticus 4:13
etc. the priest had no part
reserved for him.
Verse 15
[15] If a
soul commit a trespass
and sin through ignorance
in the holy things of the
LORD; then he shall bring for his trespass unto the LORD a ram without blemish
out of the flocks
with thy estimation by shekels of silver
after the shekel
of the sanctuary
for a trespass offering:
A trespass —
Against the Lord and his priests.
Through ignorance —
For if a man did it knowingly
he was to be cut off
Numbers 15:30.
In the holy things — In
things consecrated to God
and to holy uses; such as tithes and first-fruits
or any things due
or devoted to God
which possibly a man might either
with-hold
or employ to some common use.
A ram — A
more chargeable sacrifice than the former
as the sin of sacrilege was greater.
With thy estimation — As
thou shalt esteem or rate it
thou
O priest; and at present
thou
O Moses
for he as yet performed the priest's part. And this was an additional charge
and punishment to him; besides the ram
he was to pay for the holy thing which
he had with-held or abused
so many shekels of silver as the priest should
esteem proportionable to it.
Verse 17
[17] And
if a soul sin
and commit any of these things which are forbidden to be done by
the commandments of the LORD; though he wist it not
yet is he guilty
and
shall bear his iniquity.
The former law concerns the alienation of
holy things from sacred to common use; this may concern other miscarriages
about holy things
and holy duties
as may be gathered from Leviticus 5:19
where this is said to be a
trespass against the Lord
not in a general sense
for so every sin was; but in
a proper and peculiar sense.
── John Wesley《Explanatory Notes on
Leviticus》
05 Chapter 5
Verse 1
If he do not utter it.
Of the difference between these laws in the fifth and those in the
fourth chapter
1. The former laws seem to concern the Israelites specially
where it
said (verse 27)
“If any people of the land”; but these concern all whomsoever
they see or know to offend.
2. The sins of ignorance there are propounded generally
here
instance is given in some special and particular sins.
3. There sins are mentioned which a man committeth by himself
here
such as are done by others whereby one may be defiled.
4. Beside these laws are set forth without any distinction of
persons
as in the former chapter of the priest
the congregation
and prince
because the vulgar people are here understood
every law beginning thus
“If
any soul
” as Leviticus 4:27. “If any soul of the
people
” by this phrase
then
are meant of private persons of the vulgar sort;
as for the special persons as of the priest and prince
they must be understood
here as in the former laws to make satisfaction for these sins also with the
rite proscribed in their privileges.
5. Add hereunto the reason which is yielded by Tostatus that whereas
sins of ignorance are incident both unto the priest
prince
and people
and
differ in degree according to the quality of their persons
as it is more
grievous for the high priest to fall by error or ignorance than the
congregation
and for them rather than the prince
yet for sins committed of
malice and passion there cannot be the like difference
for the whole multitude
cannot offend in passion as of ignorance as a particular person may (Leviticus 4:1). But I resolve rather with
Cajetane
that these laws are specially understood of private persons
and of
private offences.
6. And this further difference there is between the sins rehearsed in
this chapter and the former--that there the sins of ignorance are by name
expressed
here such as proceed of passion; which kind of sins must be
understood with some kind of limitation
for there is no sin committed
though
of malice
but there is some passion in it
as he which for fear or hope of
reward forsweareth himself is led by some passion
yet it cannot properly be
called a sin of passion.
Sins of silence
The spiritual truth underlying the Mosaic law is that man is under
the direct eye of God
and his life is
therefore
lifted into direct
responsibility to God. God sees us
and God sees everything about us and within
us. Sins of silence and secrecy
sins of public error and notoriety
which go
before a man to judgment
are alike open and naked to Him with whom we have to
do. Moses taught that the life of the meanest man fulfilled itself under the
open eye of heaven. He was no mere atom in the human ant-hill
no insignificant
unit of humanity
lost in the vast ebb and flow of universal life
for
insignificance is impossible to man
and obscurity is denied him. He was a
person
active
powerful
working woe or weal to others; and just as the
calling of a man’s voice
or the footfall of a child’s step
stir the waves of
sound which travel onward and ever onward
till they may be said to break upon
the shores of the furthest stars
so the influences of a man’s life are
boundless. This passage is a striking illustration of these principles. It
recognises that sin may lie in silence as in speech
that to hear the word of
swearing and not rebuke it is to share the guilt of it; that men are
responsible to each other because they are responsible to God. There are three
forces in human life
the action of which is illustrated by this passage.
I. The first is
influence--that intangible personal atmosphere which clothes every man
an
invisible belt of magnetism
as it were
which he carries with him. Every human
being seems to possess a moral atmosphere quite peculiar to himself
which
invests and interprets him
and the presence of which others readily detect.
For instance
a pure woman carries a moral and ennobling atmosphere with her.
The atmosphere which clothes her seems to flood the room
and the coarse weeds
of vicious thought and talk cannot thrive in it. Or look on the other side of
the illustration. Picture a type of man but too common--the fast man of
society. There is an exhalation of evil which goes before him and spreads
around him. That is influence: something subtle
indefinable
yet real; without
lips
yet speaking; without visible shape
yet acting with tremendous potency
like the magnetic forces which throb and travel unseen around us
bidden in the
dewdrop and uttered in the thunder; influence
which streams out from every
human being
and shapes others
and moulds and makes them; influence
which is
stronger than action
more eloquent than speech
more enduring than life
which
being holy sows the centuries with the seeds of holy life
and being evil
multiplies
indeed
transgressors in the earth!
II. The second
force is example. Every man sets a copy for his neighbour
and his neighbour is
quick to reproduce it. The covetous man has a miser for his son
the light
woman has a daughter hastening towards the ways of shame
the drunkard infects
a whole neighbourhood with his vices.
III. And then
from
influence and example there results responsibility. You can as easily evade the
law of gravitation as the law of human responsibility. If you cease to speak
that will not rid you of the burden; you must cease to be to do that. Nay
even
death itself is powerless to destroy influence. Often it multiplies it a
thousandfold. Is the life of the heroes
the patriots
the martyrs really
closed? They were never so much alive as now; the fire that slew them freed
them
and the steps of their scaffolds were the staircase of immortality. Thus
influence and example bring with them responsibility to God and responsibility
to man.
IV. Let us mark
further the precise way in which these forces work.
1. First
it is clear that personal sin always involves others. “If a
man hear the voice of swearing
” if he even knows of it
he shares the
complicity of the sin. There is always some one who hears
who witnesses
who
shares. Here is the most tragic and awful aspect of sin--we share our sins! We
have involved others in our guilt
and if we forget they will go remembering.
It is well that thou shouldest stand in God’s house to-day
clothed with
decorous reverence
unsuspected
and with no scar of fire upon thee; but what
of the poor soiled body of that other one
the sharer of thy sin and shame? For
there is a dreadful comradeship in guilt--often intentional
for men love
company in their sins
but often unintentional
for others share what they
concealed and know what they did secretly. It is the most appalling aspect sin
assumes; it is never sterile
it is always multiplying and prolific
passing
like a fever-taint from man to man; till from one sin a world is infected and
corrupt.
2. Notice again
that he who sees a sin and does not rebuke it shares
the sin and bears its iniquity. The only way to purge one’s self of the
contaminating complicity of another man’s guilt is instantly to witness against
it. There is no other course open to a spiritual honesty.
The sin of conniving at wrong-doings
I. That the sins
of men cannot evade witnesses. An old writer has forcibly said “that to every
sin there must be at least two witnesses
” viz.
“a man’s own conscience and
the great God.”
II. That it is the
duty of witnesses to give evidence when justice demands it. When a witness
heard the words of adjuration he was required at the proper place to give the
needed information. It was his duty because--
III. That in
concealing evidence against sin we involve ourselves in serious guilt. The
guilt of concealing evidence is seen
in that by so doing we--
1. Dishonour God’s voice
which speaks within us.
2. Disobey God’s published laws.
3. Decrease our own antipathy to sin.
4. Encourage the trespasser in his wrong-doing. All sin ought to be
acknowledged and expiated for the sake of the sinner and the wronged. (F. W.
Brown.)
Lessons
1. Not to conceal
or consent to other men’s sins.
2. God’s dishonour not to be endured.
3. Confession of our sins unto God necessary (Leviticus 5:5). This is the beginning of
amendment.
4. Against negligent hearers of the Word (Leviticus 5:15).
5. Against sacrilege.
6. To take hold of the sleights and subtle temptations of Satan.
7. To appear before the Lord in sincerity and simplicity of heart. (A.
Willet
D. D.)
The voice of swearing repudiated
When the late Rev. Mr. K--was settled in his congregation of S--
they could not furnish him with lodgings. In these circumstances
a Captain
P--
in the neighbourhood
though a stranger to religion
took him into his
family. But our young clergyman soon found himself in very unpleasant
circumstances
owing to the captain’s practice of swearing. One day at table
after a very liberal volley of oaths from the captain
he observed calmly
“Captain
you have certainly made use of a number of very improper terms.” The
captain
who was rather a choleric man
was instantly in a blaze. “Pray
sir
what improper terms have I used? Surely
captain
you must know
” replied the
clergyman with greater coolness; “and having already put me to the pain of
hearing them
you cannot be in earnest in imposing upon me the additional pain
of repeating them.” “You are right
sir
” resumed the captain
“you are right.
Support your character
and we will respect you. We have a parcel of clergymen
around us here who seem quite uneasy till they get us to understand that we may
use any freedom we please before them
and we despise them.”
Guilty silence deplored and amended
Kilstein
a pious German minister
once heard a labouring man use
the most awful curses and imprecations in a fit of passion
without reproving
him for it. This so troubled him that he could scarcely sleep the following
night. In the morning he arose early
soon saw the man coming along
and
addressed him as follows: “My friend
it is you I am waiting to see.” “You are
mistaken
” replied the man; “you have never seen me before.” “Yes
I saw you
yesterday
” said Kilstein
“whilst returning from your work
and heard you praying.”
“What! heard me pray?” said the man. “I am sure now that you are mistaken
for
I never prayed in my life.” “And yet
” calmly but earnestly replied the
minister
“if God had heard your prayer
you would not be here
but in hell;
for I heard you beseeching God that He might strike you with blindness and
condemn you unto hell fire.” The man turned pale
and trembling said: “Dear
sir
do you call this prayer? Yes
it is true
I did this very thing.” “Now
my
friend
” continued Kilstein
“as you acknowledge it
it is my duty to beseech
you to seek with the same earnestness the salvation of your soul as you have
hitherto its damnation
and I will pray to God that He will have mercy upon
you.” From this time the man regularly attended upon the ministry of Kilstein
and ere long was brought in humble repentance to Christ as a true believer. “A
word in season how good it is.” “Be instant in season and out of season;
rebuke
reprove
exhort
with all long-suffering and patience.”
Sister Dora’s noble rebuke of swearing
Sister Dora was once travelling
as usual
third class
when a
number of half-drunken navvies got in after her
and before she could change
her carriage the train was in motion. She recollected that her dress
a black
gown and cloak
with a quiet black bonnet and veil
would probably
as on
former encounters with half-intoxicated men
protect her from insult. Her fellow-travellers
began to talk
and at last one of them swore several blasphemous oaths. Sister
Dora’s whole soul burnt within her
and she thought
“Shall I sit and hear
this?” but then came the reflection
“What will they do to me if I interfere?”
and this dread kept her quiet a moment or two longer. But the language became
more and more violent
and it passed through her mind
“What must these men
think of any woman who can sit by and hear such words unmoved; but
above all
what will they think of a woman in my dress who is afraid to speak to them?” At
once she stood up her full height in the carriage and called out loudly
“I
will not hear the Master whom I serve spoken of in this way.” Immediately they
dragged her down into her seat
with a torrent of oaths
and one of the most
violent roared
“Hold your jaw
you fool; do you want your face smashed in?”
They held her down on the seat between them; nor did she attempt to struggle
satisfied with having made her open protest. At the next station they let her
go
and she quickly got out of the carriage. A minute after
while she was
standing on the platform
she heard a rough voice behind her
“Shake hands
mum! you’re a good-plucked one
you are! You were right and we were wrong.” She
gave her hand to the man
who hurried away
for fear
no doubt
that his
comrades should jeer at him.
Sins of ignorance classified
If we compare the fourth and the sixth chapters of Leviticus
it
is very evident that the first broad distinction between them is that the former treats of sins
committed ignorantly
the latter of sins committed knowingly. The division
however
into sins ignorantly
and sins knowingly committed
is not alone
sufficient. Sins committed ignorantly
greatly vary
not only in the degree
but also in the kind of ignorance; and for such ignorance
we may be in
different degrees responsible. In order
therefore
to mark that such
differences are appreciated by God
and that He desires that we
too
should
appreciate them
various classifications of sins of ignorance are given in the
fifth chapter; in some of which there is so much of self-caused ignorance that
they very nearly approach
in the character of their guilt
to sins knowingly
committed
Indeed in the first example given in the fifth chapter
there is so
much that is voluntary in the action supposed
that we may perhaps wonder how
such an action can at all be placed in the same rank with sins of ignorance.
The case supposed is that of a person
who having committed a sin
and being
adjured to declare it
refuses. It is evident that terror
or forgetfulness
or
carelessness
or some plausible sophistry whereby we may deceive ourselves into
the belief that our particular case is an exception to the general rule
may
prevent such a sin from being committed with the deliberate voluntariness that
marks the trespasses of the sixth chapter. But it stands in striking contrast
with sins that spring from that deep universal ignorance which characterises
the sins of the fourth chapter. The second case is that of unconsciously
touching something that is unclean. Here
again
there is evidently no
ignorance of any general principle. The ignorance concerns a specific fact
and
is
more or less
the result of carelessness or failure in applying the tests
which we possess. There are
however
cases in which ignorance of particulars
is the immediate result of being imbued with false general principles. He whose
mind has been from his youth up trained in the school of error
and thence
received principles which have formed his habits of thought and action
will be
found very incapable of determining what is clean or unclean in the particulars
of action. The eye of his conscience is blinded; his moral sense is paralysed.
The wandering or inattentive eye may be recalled to observation; the slumbering
eye may be aroused; but how can we gain the attention of an eye
over which the
film of thick darkness has firmly formed? Sins committed in such darkness as
this would properly be traced to ignorance as their root
and would be classed
with the sins of the fifth chapter
requiring the sin-offering as there
described. (B. W. Newton.)
Complacent ignorance
Transgression may ensue from lack of knowledge that such conduct
is forbidden; or it may be that
knowing the prohibition
disobedience is
speciously excused on some vague plea that circumstances warrant it or
expediency condones it In such cases ignorance
if it be really ignorance at
all
is self-induced
and is therefore the more culpable. Amid such
reprehensible forms of ignorance may be placed--
I. Carelessness;
the mind too placid to rouse itself to inquiry.
II. Indiscrimination;
the habit of ignoring vital principles and conniving at inconsistencies.
III. Self-excusing;
finding exceptional circumstances which extenuate faults and condone
misconduct.
IV. Neglect of
scripture; not “coming to the light lest their deeds should be reproved” (John 3:20).
V. Satisfaction
with a state of conscious darkness; indifference to precise regulations of
religion
indisposition of heart towards “perfect holiness”; a loose and easy
content over failings and negligence. Ignorance is by some persons consciously
cherished: it allows them a covert from the exactions of a lofty and honest
piety.
VI. Plausible
sophistry; entertaining the delusion that because there is not determined
wilfulness in sinning
Or not fullest knowledge of God’s prohibitions of sin
they are less responsible
less to be condemned. Note: Many persons
trained
from youth in a school of error
grow up with false principles dominating their
judgments and consciences
or with ignorance of the application of right
principles to particular incidents and actions. Thus Luther
trained amid the
blinding theories of Romanism
groped on till manhood in delusions and dimness.
Thus Paul
brought up amid the traditions of Judaism
found his soul clouded
with wholly wrong thoughts concerning what was “doing God service.” It is our
duty to undeceive ourselves
to inquire after knowledge
to seek full light
that our dimness may yield to discernment. A complacent ignorance is as the
softly gliding stream which flows onwards to the rapids. To be able to rest in
such self-satisfied ignorance indicates that self-delusion has began
portending doom. “Whom the gods would destroy they first dement.”
1. Search the Scriptures.
2. Seek the Spirit’s illumination.
3. Culture a pure and enlightened conscience.
4. Exercise the judgment and will in efforts to “cease from evil and
learn to do well.” (W. H. Jellie.)
Adjuration
Our translation suggests
if it suggests at all
a very obscure
and imperfect meaning. It is not
“If a soul hear a person swear
and do not
rebuke the swearer
or tell of the swearer
” which seems to be suggested by our
version; but
If a person summoned to a court of law
under the ancient Jewish
economy
adjured by the officiating judge to tell the truth
should not so tell
the truth
and all that he knew
then he should be guilty. We have an
illustration of this verse in such a passage as that where the high priest came
to our blessed Lord
as recorded in Matthew 26:63
and said
“I adjure thee
by the living God
that Thou tell us whether Thou be the Christ
the Son of
God.” Now
that was the high priest acting upon the first verse of this very
chapter. And our Lord then heard what is called “the swearing” in this verse
or what in that case was the adjuration of the high priest; and as you notice
so
obedient was the true Lamb
the true Saviour
to all the requirements of the
ceremonial law
that though He had been dumb when asked previously
yet the
moment that the high priest adjured Him
that moment
in obedience to the first
verse of this chapter
our blessed Lord answered the question addressed to Him;
as if it was impossible that He could fail in the observance of the least jot
or tittle of the ceremonial law
any more than in the weightiest requirement of
God’s moral law. We have in Proverbs 29:1-27. an allusion to this:
“He heareth an adjuration
and telleth not
”--that is laid down as a sin
or
in other words
the violation of this verse. (J. C. Cumming
D. D.)
Verse 2
He also shall be unclean.
Moral contagion
This avoidance of unclean animals and places is not without
practical illustration in our own personal experience and action. To-day
for
example
we avoid places that are known to be fever-stricken. We are alarmed
lest we should bring ourselves within the influence of contagion. The strongest
man might fear if he knew that a letter were put into his hand which had come
from a house where fever was fatally raging. However heroic he might be in
sentiment
and however inclined to boast of the solidity of his nervous system
it is not impossible that even the strongest man might shrink from taking the
hand of a fever-stricken friend. All this is natural and all this is
justifiable
and
in fact
any defiance of this would be unnatural and
unjustifiable. Is there
then
no suggestion in all such rational caution that
there may be moral danger from moral contagion? Can a body emit pestilence and
a soul dwell in all evil and riot in all wantonness without giving out an
effluvium fatal to moral vigour and to spiritual health? The suggestion is
preposterous. They are the unwise and most reprehensible men who being afraid
of a fever have no fear of a moral pestilence; who running away in mortal
terror from influences leading towards small-pox
cholera
and other fatal
diseases
rush into companionships
and actions
and servitudes which are
positively steeped and saturated with moral pollution. That we are more
affected by the one than by the other only shows that we are more body than
soul. Literally
the text does not refer in all probability to a purely
spiritual action
yet not the less is the suggestion justified by experience
that even the
soul considered in its most spiritual sense may touch things that are unclean
and may be defiled by them. A poor thing indeed that the hand has kept itself
away from pollution and defilement if the mind has opened wide all the points
of access to the influence of evil. Sin may not only be in the hand
it may be
roiled as a sweet morsel under the tongue. There may be a chamber of imagery in
the heart
i man
may be utterly without offence in any social acceptation of that term--actually
a friend of magistrates and judges
and himself a high interpreter of the law
of social morality and honour
and yet all the while may be hiding a very
perdition in his heart. It is the characteristic mystery of the salvation of
Jesus Christ that it does not come to remove stains upon the flesh or spots
upon the garments
but to work out an utter and eternal cleansing in the secret
places of the soul
so that the heart itself may in the event be without “spot
or wrinkle or any such thing”--pure
holy
radiant
even dazzling with light
fit to be looked upon by the very eye of God. (J. Parker
D. D.)
Dread of defilement
Pierius Valerianus
in his book of Egyptian Hieroglyphics
maketh
mention of a kind of white mouse
called the Armenian mouse
being of such a
cleanly disposition
that it will rather die than be any way defiled
so that
the passage into her hole being besmeared with any filth
she will rather
expose herself to the mercy of her cruel enemy
than any way seek to save her
life by passing so foul an entrance. (J. Spencer.)
Defilement to be avoided
Men have looked into the crater of a volcano to see what was
there
and going down to explore
without coming back to report progress. Many
and many a man has gone to see what was in hell
that did see it. Many and many
a man has looked to see what was in the cup
and routed a viper coiled up
therein. Many and many a man has gone into the house of lust
and found that
the ends thereof were death--bitter
rotten death. Many and many a man has
sought to learn something of the evils of gambling
and learned it to his own
ruin. And I say to every man
the more you know about these things the more you
ought to be ashamed of knowing; a knowledge of them is not necessary to
education or manhood; and they ought to be avoided
because when a man has once
fallen into them
the way out is so steep and hard. (H. W. Beecher.)
Verse 5
He shall confess that he hath sinned in that thing.
Sin must be fully confessed
Cover sin over as much as we may
and smother it down as carefully
as we can
it will break out. Many years ago the packet ship Poland was
bound for Havre
with a cargo of cotton on board. By some singular accident the
cotton took fire clear down in the hold. The captain
finding that he could not
reach the fire
undertook to smother it; but in vain. Then he caulked down the
hatchways; but the deck grew so hot that neither passengers nor crew could
stand on it. At length he fired a signal gun in distress
put all his people
into the boats
and left the doomed ship to her fate. He watched her as she
ploughed gallantly through the waves
with all her canvas on; but ere she sunk
below the horizon
the fire burst forth in a sheet of flame to the mast-head.
That ill-fated packet
carrying the fatal fire in her own hold
is a vivid
picture of the moral condition of thousands of men and women. They cover
their sins by all manner of concealments; they batten down the hatchways with a
show of respectability
and
alas! sometimes with an outward profession of
religion; but the deadly thing remains underneath in the heart
and if it does
not burst forth in this world
it will in the next. Probably this reveals the
reason why some Church members are so constantly halting and stumbling and fall
so easily into backsliding. Their “first works” of repentance and confession to
God were shallow. (T. L. Cuyler.)
Particular sins must be confessed
Physicians meeting with diseased bodies
when they find a
general distemperature
they labour by all the art they can to draw the humour
to another place
and then they break it
and bring out all the corruptions
that way; all which is done for the better ease of the patient. Even so must
all of us do when we have a general and confused sorrow for our sins; i.e.
labour as much as may be to draw them into particulars; as to say
In this
and in this
at such and such a time
on such an occasion
and in such a place
I have sinned against my God; for it is not enough for a man to be sorrowful in
the general
because he is a sinner; but he must draw himself out into
particulars
in what manner
and with what sins he hath displeased God
otherwise he may deceive his own soul. (J. Spencer.)
Verses 14-19
If a soul commit a trespass.
The trespass-offering
I. As to the
distinctive character of this offering.
1. It was not a “sweet savour” offering. Christ is here seen
suffering for sins; the view of His work is expiatory.
2. It was a trespass as distinct from a sin-offering. Not the person
but the act of wrong-doing
is the point noticed and dwelt upon. And how solemn
is the truth here taught us
that neither our conscience
nor our measure of
light
nor our ability
but the truth of God
is the standard by which both sin
and trespass are to be measured. “Though he wist it not
yet is he guilty; he
hath certainly trespassed against the Lord.” If man’s conscience or man’s light
were the standard
each man might have a different rule. And
at this rate
right or wrong
good or evil
would depend
not upon God’s truth
but on the
creature’s apprehension of it. At this rate
the filthiest of unclean beasts
could not be convicted of uncleanness
while it could plead that it had no
apprehension of that which was pure and seemly. But we do not judge thus in the
things of this world; neither does God judge so in the things of heaven. Who
argues that because swine are filthy
therefore the standard of cleanliness is
to be set by their perceptions or ability; or that because they seem
unconscious of their state
therefore the distinction between what is clean and
unclean must be relinquished. No: we judge not by their perceptions
but our
own; with our light and knowledge
not their ignorance
as our standard.
3. In the trespass-offering we get restitution
furl restitution for
the original wrong. The amount of the injury
according to the priest’s
valuation of it
is paid in shekels of the sanctuary to the injured person. The
thought here is not that trespass is punished
but that the injured party is
repaid the wrong. The payment was in shekels: these “shekels of the sanctuary”
were the appointed standard by which God’s rights were measured; as it is said
“And all thy estimation shall be according to the shekel of the sanctuary.”
Thus they represent the truest measure
God’s standard by which He weighs all
things. By this standard the trespass is weighed
and then the value paid to
the injured person. And God and man
though wronged by trespass
each receive
as much again from man in Christ through the trespass-offering. Whether honour
service
worship
or obedience
whatever God could claim
whatever man could
rob Him of
all this has He received again from man in Christ
“according to
the priest’s estimation in shekels of the sanctuary.” But man also was injured
by trespass; and he
too
receives as much again. Christ for man as offerer of
the trespass-offering
must offer to injured man the value of the original
injury. And such as accept His offering find their loss through man’s trespass
more than paid. Has trespass wronged man of life
peace
or gladness
he may
claim and receive through Christ repayment. For man to man
as for man to God
Christ stands the One in whom man’s wrongs are remedied.
4. But this is not all. Not only is the original wrong paid
but a
fifth part more is paid with it in the trespass-offering. Who would have
thought that from the entrance of trespass
both God and man should in the end
be gainers? But so it is. From man in Christ both God and man have received
back more than they were robbed of. In this sense
“where sin abounded
” yea
and because sin abounded
“grace did more abound.”
II. The varieties
or grades in this offering. These are fewer than in any other offering
teaching
us that those who apprehended this aspect of Christ’s work
will apprehend it
all very much alike. It will be remembered that in the sin-offering the
varieties were most numerous and that because sin in us may be
and is
so
differently apprehended; but trespass
the act of wrong committed
if seen at
all
can scarce be seen differently. Accordingly
we find but one small variety
in the trespass-offering
for I can scarce regard the two different aspects of
trespass as varieties. These aspects are
first
trespasses against God
and
then trespasses against our neighbour; but this distinction is more like the
difference between the offerings than the varieties in different grades of the
same. It simply points out distinct bearings of trespass
for which in each
case the atonement seen is precisely similar. There is
however
one small yet
remarkable difference between the two grades of the offering for wrongs in holy
things. In the first grade
which gives us the fullest view of the offering
we
read of the life laid down
the restitution made
and the fifth part added. But
in the lower class
the last of these is unnoticed: “the fifth part” is quite
unseen. And how true this is in the experience of Christians. Where the measure
of apprehension is full
there not only the life laid down
and the restitution
made in the trespass-offering
but all the truth also which is caught in the
“fifth part
” will be seen as a consequence of trespass and a part of the trespass-offering.
Not so
however
where the apprehension is limited: here there is no addition
seen beyond the amount of the original trespass. (A. Jukes.)
The trespass-offering; or
substitution and restitution
I. The
trespass-offering (or guilt-offering
R.V.) refers more especially to the evil
actions which are the outcome of our corrupt nature: while the sin that is
inherent in that nature
as descendants of fallen Adam
is fully met in the
sin-offering--last considered. The evil deeds
or sins
met by the trespass-offering
may be thus divided--as against God and against man.
II. “a trespass . .
. through ignorance
in the holy things of the lord
” is the first mentioned.
Here there is a similarity to the sin spoken of in chap. 4.
for it is “through
ignorance.” Who can measure the holiness of God
or know the extent of sin
against such a Being? Perfect purity and holiness demand the same; but we are
born in sin
“shapen in iniquity” (Psalms 51:5); and “who can bring a clean
thing out of an unclean? Not one” (Job 14:4). Hence
till the heart is
changed by “the grace of God” (Romans 5:15; 1 Corinthians 15:10)
the sin within
is ever showing itself in evil actions; and even after we know the Lord we are
apt to trespass in His “holy things.” In men’s very religion
too
there may be
sin. How often do they invent a worship of their own
not in accordance with
God’s Word; a way of salvation which dishonours Him; a way of approach to Him
other than He has given! If living for self
the world
or other purpose than
God’s glory
we are robbing God. It may be through ignorance
but “though he
wist it not
yet he is guilty
and shall bear his iniquity” (Leviticus 4:17-19)
saith the Lord. There
is thus no hope for us in ourselves
but He has met this (as all) our need in
His “Beloved Son
” as shown in type before us
for the sinning one is bidden to
bring--
1. “A ram without blemish . . . for a trespass-offering” (guilt-offering
R.V.)
“and the priest shall make atonement for him concerning his ignorance .
. . ;” for “he hath certainly trespassed against the Lord.” Mark well the words
“certainly trespassed
” though in ignorance. The same truth is here again shown
that no sin could be atoned for without the shedding of Jesu’s blood; but His
was a full
perfect
and complete atonement
when He made “His soul a
guilt-offering” (Isaiah 53:10
marg.
R.V.; same word as
verses 5:19
R.V.). He “was delivered up for our trespasses” (Romans 4:25; Romans 5:16
R.V.)
2. “Shekels of silver
after the shekel of the sanctuary
” were also
to be brought with the ram
to “make amends for the harm . . . done in the holy
thing.” No lower standard than God’s could be accepted. Have we a just
perception of God’s holiness?
3. A fifth part added. Who could do this in its full meaning? None
but Jesus. And He brought more glory to God by redemption than could have
accrued from creation. Christ was perfect in His obedience to God’s holy law
and gave rich surplus. He--the Antitype of trespass-offering (both of ram and
silver
1 Peter 1:18-19)--was also Priest
who made atonement or reconciliation (Romans 5:10-11; 1 John 2:2); and the blessed result
is--
4. Forgiveness (verses 16
18) to “all that believe” (Acts 13:38-39).
III. Wrong done to a
neighbour is equally described as “trespass against the Lord” (Leviticus 6:1-7). This the unregenerate
heart fails to see
but God pronounces it to be “sin”; and the truth of Hebrews 9:22 is once more brought before
us; but
in contrast to the trespass against the holy things
in the case of wrong done to a neighbour--restitution
with addition of fifth part must be made
before bringing the trespass-offering
of “a ram without blemish
” with the “estimation.” The former teaches that only
on the ground of blood shed could God accept the offerer
or “the amends” He
would have him make; whereas
in the case of wrong done to a neighbour
“amends” must first be made to that neighbour before pardon can be sought of
God. This is the lesson enforced by our Lord (Matthew 5:23-24; Matthew 6:14-15). See
too
Zaccheus
ready to “restore fourfold” (Luke 19:8). To approach God with a wrong
against a neighbour unredressed will not bring acceptance; while in the case of
trespass against the Lord in holy things
pardon through Jesus must first be
sought before “amends for the harm” done
can be accepted. Each must be
according to God’s ordering
and then there is the same gracious promise of
forgiveness (verses 16
18
6:7; Ephesians 4:32; Colossians 3:13).
IV. The law of the
trespass-offering opens out some further details (Leviticus 7:1-7). It was to be--
1. Killed in the same place as the burnt-offering (Leviticus 1:5; Leviticus 1:11)
that is
“on the side of
the altar northward before the Lord.” It was the “same Jesus” in all
though
different aspects and results of His death are presented in each.
2. The blood was to be sprinkled “round about upon the altar.” Only
in the sin-offering was it to be poured out
as that offering presented a more
comprehensive view of the fulness of the atonement.
3. The costliest parts were to be burned on the altar
as in the
sin-offering
telling of the rich and intrinsic excellency of the Lord Jesus
which could stand the searching fire of God’s holiness.
4. “Most holy” (Leviticus 6:25; Leviticus 6:29; Leviticus 7:1; Leviticus 7:6). The use of such an
expression
in connection with sin-offering and trespass-offering is most
striking. The more we meditate thereon the more we learn how the heart’s affection
mind
inward parts
were all perfect in Jesus--hence He is a perfect Saviour.
Lastly
the trespass-offering was--
5. To be eaten in the Holy Place
by “every male among the priests
”
typifying the Church
as partakers of Him who bare their “sins” (1 Peter 2:24)
while “the priest
that maketh atonement” was type of Jesus
thus seen to identify Himself with His people. (Lady
Beaujolois Dent.)
Sacrilege
The trespass here indicated is sacrilege--mistake and
misappropriation in the use of sacred things: a culpable trespass
whether done
wittingly or unwittingly. From this rite we are taught--
I. The jealousy of
Jehovah for the honour of his worship in the tabernacle.
II. The influence
this jealousy was calculated to exert upon the worshippers in the tabernacle.
1. Sensitiveness of feeling.
2. Tenderness of conscience.
3. Scrupulousness of conduct. (F. W. Brown)
.
Reparation
I. Sin is a wrong
done to god.
II. Sin is a wrong
done to man. Amends
must be made by--
1. Appropriate contrition.
2. Personal sacrifice.
3. Unreserved consecration: evincing itself in a holy
useful
Christly life. (F. W. Brown)
Error
though inadvertent
is guilty
I. A sophistry
needing correction. This: that intention constitutes the quality of an action
whether conduct is criminal or not. But this declaration of “guilt
” though in
the action he “wist it not
” testifies against a sweeping and
all-inclusive application of that principle
viz.
that intention qualifies
action.
1. Ignorance may and does extenuate the guilt of an action. Knowledge
deepens guilt (John 9:41; John 15:22). Ignorance alleviates it (Luke 23:34; Acts 3:17; 1 Timothy 1:13).
2. Yet ignorance cannot excuse guilt. A man is not excused for
breaking the laws of the land because he was ignorant of them. Nor is he
innocent who trespasses
through error
against any ordinance of the Lord. And
if so in respect of ceremonial observances
much more so in relation to moral
duties. Hence the curse stands against “every one that continueth not in all
things written in the book of the law to do them” (Galatians 3:10).
3. God Himself refuses to condone such ignorance. His Word declares
that men “perish for lack of knowledge” (Hosea 4:6); and that though “a people be
of no understanding
He will not have mercy on them
and will show them no
favour.”
II. Man’s
uncomputed guilt.
1. Reckon up our remembered sins. “They are more in number than the
hairs of our head.”
2. Add the sins realised at the time but now forgotten. Memory lets
slip multitudinous trespasses.
3. Yet what can represent the number of our unrecognised sins
done
in ignorance
done in error?
4. Deviations and defects also
which God’s eye alone detected
and
which we too self-indulgently condoned.
III. Vast virtue
needed in atonement.
1. Under the ceremonial arrangements for expiation
how manifold and
minute and numerous were the regulations and provisions necessary to make
atonement for sin!
2. When all sin had to be expiated by Christ’s one offering
what
value it must needs possess! Yet “by one offering” the Saviour “purged
our sins.”
Gain by redemption
In the addition of “the fifth part
” as here set forth
we
have a feature of the true trespass-offering
which
it is to be feared
is but
little appreciated. When we think of all the wrong and all the trespass which
we have done against the Lord; and
further
when we remember how God has been
wronged of His rights in this wicked world
with what interest can we
contemplate the work of the Cross as that wherein God has not merely received
back what was lost
but whereby He is an actual gainer. He has gained more by
redemption than ever He lost by the fall. “The sons of God” could raise a
loftier song of praise around the empty tomb of Jesus than ever they raised in
view of the Creator’s accomplished work. The wrong has not only been perfectly
atoned for
but an eternal advantage has been gained by the work of the Cross.
This is a stupendous truth. God is a gainer by the work of Calvary. Who could
have conceived this? When we behold man
and the creation of which he was lord
laid in ruins at the feet of the enemy
how could we conceive that
from amid
those ruins
God should gather richer and nobler spoils than any which our
unfallen world could have yielded? Blessed be the name of Jesus for all this!
It is to Him we owe it all. It is by His precious Cross that ever a truth so
amazing
so divine
could be enunciated. (C. H. Mackintosh.)
Verse 17-18
Though he wist it not
yet is he guilty.
Sins of ignorance
It is supposed in our text that men might commit forbidden things
without knowing it; nay
it is not merely supposed
but it is taken for
granted
and provided for. The Levitical law had special statutes for sins of
ignorance
and one of its sections begins with these words (Leviticus 4:2). It is first of all
supposed that a priest may sin (Leviticus 4:3). As Trapp says
“The sins
of teachers are teachers of sins
” and therefore they were not overlooked
but
had to be expiated by trespass-offerings. Further on in the chapter (verse 22)
it is supposed that a ruler may sin. Errors in leaders are very fruitful of
mischief
and therefore they were to be repented of and put away by an
expiatory sacrifice. It was also according to the law regarded as very likely
that any man might fall into sins of ignorance
for in Leviticus 4:27
we read
“And if any one
of the common people sin through ignorance
while he doeth somewhat against any
of the commandments of the Lord.” The sin even of the commonest person was not
to be passed over as a mere trifle
even though he could plead ignorance of the
law. An enlightened conscience mourns over sins of ignorance
which it would
never do if they were innocent mistakes. The word rendered “ignorance” may also
bear the translation of “inadvertence.” Inadvertence is a kind of acted
ignorance: a man frequently does wrong for want of thought
through not
considering the bearing of his action
or even thinking at all. He carelessly
and hastily blunders into the course which first suggests itself
and errs
because he did not study to be right. There is very much sin of this kind
committed every day. There is no intent to do wrong
and yet wrong is done.
Culpable neglect creates a thousand faults. “Evil is wrought by want of thought
as well as want of heart.” We do not take time enough to examine our actions;
we do not take good heed to our steps. Life should be a careful work of art
in
which every single line and tint should be the fruit of study and thought
like
the paintings of the great master who was wont to say
“I paint for eternity”;
but alas! life is often slurred over
like those hasty productions of the scene
painter
in which present effect alone is studied
and the canvas becomes a
mere daub of colours hastily laid on. We seem intent to do much rather than to
do well; we want to cover space rather than to reach perfection. This is not
wise. Oh that every single thought were conformed to the will of God! Now
seeing that there are sins of ignorance and sins of inadvertence
what about
them? Is there any actual guilt in them? In our text we have the Lord’s mind
and judgment.
I. By the Divine
declaration that sins of ignorance are really sins the commandment of god is
honoured.
1. Enlarging upon this thought
I would observe that hereby the law
is declared to be the supreme authority over men. The law is supreme
not
conscience. Conscience is differently enlightened in different men
and the
ultimate appeal as to right and wrong cannot be to your half-blinded conscience
or to mine. If we break the law
although our conscience may not blame us
or
even inform us of the wrong
yet still the deed is recorded against us; we must
bear our iniquity. The law is also set above human opinion
for this man says
“You may do that
” and a second claims that he may do the other
but the law
changes not according to man’s judgment
and does not bend itself to the spirit of the age or the
taste of the period. It is the supreme judge
from whose infallible decision
there is no appeal. This exalts the law above the custom of nations and
periods; for men are very wont to say
“It is true I did so and so
which I
could not have defended in itself; but then it is the way of the trade
other
houses do so
general opinion and public consent have endorsed the custom; I do
not therefore see how I can act differently from others
for if I did so I
should be very singular
and should probably be a loser through my
scrupulosity.” Yes
but the customs of men are not the standard of right.
2. Note again
if a sin of ignorance renders us guilty
what must a
wilful sin do? Do you not perceive at once how the law is again set on high by
this?
3. Thus again
by the teaching of our text
men were driven to study
the law: for if they were at all right-hearted they said
“Let us know what God
would have us do. We do not wish to be leaving His commands undone
or
committing transgressions against His prohibitory precepts through not knowing
better.”
4. And you will see at once that this would lead every earnest
Israelite to teach his children God’s law
lest his son should err through
ignorance or indavertence. Fear of committing sins of ignorance was a spur to
national education
and tended greatly to make all Israel honour the law of the
Lord.
5. I close these thoughts by noting that to me the sin-revealing
power of the law is wonderfully displayed as I read my text. What a law is this
by which men are bound! How severe and searching! How holy and how pure must
God Himself be!
II. By the teaching
of the text the conscience is aroused.
1. Our ignorance is evidently very great. As the conies swarm in the
holes of the rocks
the bats in the sunless caves of the earth
and the fish in
the deep abysses of the sea
so do our sins swarm in the hidden parts of our
nature. “Who can understand his errors? Cleanse Thou me from secret faults!”
2. The ignorance of very many persons is to a large degree wilful.
Many do not read the Bible at all
or very seldom
and then without desiring to
know its meaning. Even some professing Christians take their religion from the
monthly magazine
or some standard book written by a human author and adopted
by their sect
but few go to the Word of God itself; they are content to drink
of the muddied streams of human teaching instead of filling their cups at the
crystal fount of revelation itself. Now
if ye be ignorant of anything
concerning God’s mind and will
it is not
in the case of any of you
for want
of the Book
nor for want of a willing guide to instruct you in it; for
behold
the Holy Spirit waiteth to be gracious to you in this respect. Break
in
O light eternal! Break in upon the dimness of our ignorance.
3. Now it will be vain for any man to say in his mind
as I fear some
will do
“God is hard in thus dealing with us.” If thou sayest thus
O man
I
ask thee to remember God’s answer. Christ puts your rebellious speech into the
mouth of the unfaithful one who hid his talent. Wiser far is it to submit and
crave for mercy.
4. Let us recollect
in order that our doctrine may appear less
strange
that it is according to the analogy of nature that when God’s laws are
broken
ignorance of those laws should not prevent the penalty falling upon the
offenders.
5. It is of necessity that it should be according to this
declaration. It is not possible that ignorance should be a justification of
sin; for
first
if it were so
it would follow that the more ignorant a man
was the more innocent he would be. If
again
the guilt of an action depended
entirely upon a man’s knowledge
we should have no fixed standard at all by
which to judge right and wrong; it would be variable according to the
enlightenment of each man
and there would be no ultimate and infallible court
of appeal. Moreover
ignorance of the law of God is itself a bleach of law
since we are bidden to know and remember it. Can it be possible
then
that one
sin is to be an excuse for another? If sins of ignorance are not sins
then
Christ’s intercession was altogether a superfluity.
6. Once again
I am sure that many of us now present must have felt
the truth of this in our own hearts. You who love the Lord and hate
unrighteousness
must in your lives have come to a point of greater
illumination
where you have said
“I see a certain action to be wrong; I have
been doing it for years
but God knows I would not have done it if I bad
thought it wrong. Even now I see that other people are doing it
and thinking
it right; but I cannot do so any more; my conscience has at last received new
light
and I must make a change at once.” In such circumstances did it ever
come to your mind to say
“What I have done was not wrong
because I did not
know it to be wrong”? Far from it. You have justly said to yourself
“My sin in
this matter is not so great as if I had transgressed wilfully with my eyes
open
knowing it to be sin”; but yet you have accused yourself of the fault and
mourned over it.
III. By the grand and awful truth
of the text the sacrifice is endeared. Just according to our sense of sin must
be our value of the sacrifice. God’s way of delivering those who sinned
ignorantly was not by denying their sin and passing it over
but by accepting
an atonement for it. Under the law this atonement was to be a ram without
blemish. Our Lord had no sin
nor shade of sin. He is the spotless victim which
the law requires. All that justice
in its most severe mood
could require from
man by way of penalty our Lord Jesus Christ has rendered; for in addition to
His sacrifice for the sin
He has presented a recompense for the damage
as the
person who sinned ignorantly was bound to do. He has recompensed the honour of
God
and He has recompensed every man whom we have injured. Has another injured
you? Well
since Christ has given Himself to you
there is a full recompense
made to you
even as there has been made to God. We may rest in this sacrifice.
How supremely efficacious it is. It takes away iniquity
transgression
and
sin. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Ignorance may be culpable
Some years ago through the mistake of a signalman an accident took
place on the Metropolitan Railway
by which several persons lost their lives.
At the inquiry it transpired that the signalman had in his possession a book of
instructions which if they had been attended to the accident could not have occurred
but this book he confessed he had never read
hence the terrible accident. How
many of the sins of professing Christians may be traced to similar culpable
ignorance!
Knowledge of God’s law to be cultivated
A kindred error is that a man does right when he obeys his
conscience--does what his conscience tells him is right; in other words
does
what he thinks is right. If this be true then Saul was right when he made havoc
of the Church
for he verily thought he was doing God service. We are
no
doubt
bound to do what we think is right; but we are under equal obligations
to have our thinking in regard to duty correct. God has given us reason
moral
powers
and revelation that we may know our duty and do it. The intellect needs
training that it may perceive what is true. The conscience needs training that
it may perceive what is true; in other words
the mind’s power of perceiving
both scientific and moral truth needs cultivating. It may err in regard to
scientific truth. It may err in regard to moral truth. In regard to the latter
we have an infallible standard in the Word of God
which
if rightly applied
will relieve us from error. We see why the Bible attaches so much importance to
a knowledge of the truth. It is the condition of right perception in regard to
duty.
──《The Biblical Illustrator》