The Trespass Offering

The Sacrificial System – How To Draw Near To God

The Trespass Offering
Lev. 5:14 – 6:7

This morning we are in Leviticus 5 and we will be looking at the last of the five offerings that regulated the sacrificial system of Old Testament Israel. The first three of these offerings – burnt, grain, and peace – were voluntary, and the final two – the sin and trespass – were mandatory. The overall purpose of these offerings was that they enabled the person bringing it to “draw near” to God. God is holy, and they weren‟t – and that‟s a problem! Sometimes the distance between them and God was sin, and sometimes the distance was because Christ had not yet come on the scene to serve as the one “mediator between God and man.” These offerings allowed the people to deal with the sin (sin and trespass) and the lack of a mediator (burnt, grain, and peace offerings – two of the three offerings did not accomplish “atonement”) and actually approach, or draw near to, and be in fellowship with God.

Memory Project: “Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, „Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, „I am the LORD your God. You shall not do what is done in the land of Egypt where you lived, nor are you to do what is done in the land of Canaan where I am bringing you; you shall not walk in their statutes. You are to perform My judgments and keep My statutes, to live in accord with them; I am the LORD your God. So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the LORD.‟”

The final offering is called the trespass offering. If you‟ll look with me at 5:15, if you are using the NAS you read, “if a person acts unfaithfully.” In the NIV it reads, “If a person commits a violation.” And in the KJV, it reads, “If a soul commit a trespass.” This is where we get the label for this offering, and in contrast to the sin offering we looked at last week, the instructions for this one has only 13 verses describing it.

As we think about the significance of the trespass offering, it was designed to cover two different categories of sins. We see the first category mentioned in verse 15, “If any one commit a trespass, and sin unwittingly, in the holy things of the LORD.” Committing a trespass in the “things of the Lord” would involve things like not bringing in a full tithe of your crops (that could be hard to verify), or maybe sacrificing an animal that was sickly. The other category of sins the trespass offering covered is seen in chapter 6 verse 2, “When a person sins and acts unfaithfully against the LORD, and deceives his companion in regard to a deposit or a security entrusted to him, or through robbery, or if he has extorted from his companion.” This category of sins all focus on sinning against a fellow Israelite. So what we see here is actually a replication of the ten commandments – the first four all deal with our relationship to God, and the last six all deal with our relationship to our fellow man.

Now, as we read these verses earlier, you probably noticed a word that we looked at last week – the word “unintentional.” Verse 15 says, “If a person acts unfaithfully and sins unintentionally against the Lord’s holy things . . .” Since that is true, what is the difference between these two offerings? In a word, it is the concept of restitution. In the sin offering we looked at last week, restitution was not possible. If you had a farm accident and your hired helper was killed, there is nothing you can do to make up for it. If you accidentally brushed up against a leper, there was nothing you could do to undo your defilement. In cases like this, you offered a sin offering and went your way. That isn‟t the case with the trespass offering – restitution is possible when you steal something from someone or withhold something that belongs to God.

There are several things that are very interesting about this offering that I want to spend some time developing. The first is that this offering highlights the horizontal nature of sin. When we sin, our relationship with our fellow man is hurt. This is the significance of what the prodigal said when he came back home. “Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight.” Sin is never limited to being an offense against God alone, and part of what brings about the restoration of fellowship with God is the restoration of fellowship with your fellow man. That is a very important concept, and to illustrate for us the importance of it, let‟s go to the book of Philemon and see this biblical principle.

In a nutshell, the book of Philemon is a letter written by the Apostle Paul. He is in prison in Rome, and he is writing to a Christian by the name of Philemon, who had a runaway slave named Onesimus. When Onesimus took off, it is very possible that he stole some money from his owner, and eventually he ends up in Rome. In Rome, his path crosses Paul‟s, and Paul leads him to Christ. What is Paul supposed to do now with this newly saved, runaway slave?

 Do you send him back to his master and expect him to submit to all the evils and horrors of slavery in the Roman era?

 How much can you ask of a new Christian? Cf. “take them where they are . . .”

 Do you ask the slave‟s owner to overlook the crime and “just let bygones be bygone.”

Paul has a very delicate situation on his hands and I love how he deals with it. Let‟s start reading in verse eight where he begins by throwing his weight around.

Therefore, though I have enough confidence in Christ to order you to do that which is proper [he is an apostle with tremendous authority in the church], 9 yet for love's sake I rather appeal to you-- [and now he is going to lay it on thick!] since I am such a person as Paul, the aged, and now also a prisoner of Christ Jesus -- 10 I appeal to you for my child, whom I have begotten in my imprisonment, Onesimus, 11 who formerly was useless to you, but now is useful both to you and to me. 12 And I have sent him back to you in person [this answers our first question – do you expect new converts to do hard things?], that is, sending my very heart, 13 whom I wished to keep with me, that in your behalf he might minister to me in my imprisonment for the gospel; 14 but without your consent I did not want to do anything, that your goodness should not be as it were by compulsion, but of your own free will. 15 For perhaps he was for this reason parted from you for a while, that you should have him back forever [he is acknowledging God‟s sovereignty here], 16 no longer as a slave, but more than a slave, a beloved brother, especially to me, but how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord. 17 If then you regard me a partner, accept him as you would me. 18 But if he has wronged you in any way, or owes you anything, charge that to my account.

That last phrase is significant because Paul is offering to pay back the money Onesimus stole. Was Paul just being kind and generous, or is there a larger issue at stake? I believe there is a larger principle being followed, and that principle has its roots in Lev. 5 and the trespass offering which focuses on restitution.

So the most obvious and significant relationship that suffers when we sin is that of our relationship with God. Sin breaks God‟s heart and our fellowship with Him. But what other kind of relationships suffer? The next most obvious relationship that suffers is that of our relationship with the sinned against party. Let‟s go back to Lev. 6 where God gives us some illustrations of the sins for which the trespass offering was necessary.

Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 2 "When a person sins and acts unfaithfully against the LORD, and deceives his companion in regard to a deposit or a security entrusted to him, or through robbery, or if he has extorted from his companion, 3 or has found what was lost and lied about it and sworn falsely, so that he sins in regard to any one of the things a man may do; 4 then it shall be, when he sins and becomes guilty, that he shall restore what he took by robbery, or what he got by extortion, or the deposit which was entrusted to him, or the lost thing which he found.

Examples of sins needing the trespass offering were robbery, extortion, not returning a deposit, or keeping something of value you found that you knew belonged to someone else. This could also cover things like not paying your laborer his wages at the end of the day. But each of these sins involves an offended party – someone is hurt by your sinful actions. It is important to understand that not only was God offended, but also your fellow Israelite was offended.

Have you ever thought about how easy it is to make things right with God? It‟s relatively easy, isn‟t it? There is a degree of anonymity (not technically, but I can‟t see Him), and He‟s predictable in how He responds, according to 1 John 1:9. “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” But dealing with the sinned against party is a different story, isn‟t it? I can see him, and he‟s not really predictable.

But getting back to Paul and Philemon, Paul knew that the sin of Onesimus was offensive to not only God but also Philemon. So if Onesimus was going to be right with God, he was also going to have to be right with Philemon. That is the overriding principle behind the trespass offering. It was designed to bring about peace and reconciliation not only between the sinner and his God but also between the sinner and the person he has sinned against.

Let‟ s take a minute and look at this matter of reparation. The way this offering restored relationships between estranged human parties is seen in Lev. 6:4-5 – “then it shall be, when he sins and becomes guilty, that he shall restore [“to return”] what he took by robbery, or what he got by extortion, or the deposit which was entrusted to him, or the lost thing which he found, or anything about which he swore falsely; he shall make restitution [the word is shalem – sounds familiar, doesn‟t it? It is very close to shalom, the greeting of “peace.” It means “to be complete” or “sound”] for it in full, and add to it one fifth more. He shall give it to the one to whom it belongs on the day he presents his guilt offering.”

The way this worked is that if you defrauded your neighbor of 100 shekels of silver, when you were exposed in your fraud, before you brought your ram to the tabernacle for a trespass offering, you took 120 shekels of silver to the one you defrauded. This is not an “eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth” kind of justice, is it? This is a principle that says, crime doesn‟t pay. In fact, in this kind of a setup, the crime cost you more than you could gain from your criminal activity.

Restoration (giving back what you took) plus restitution (plus 20% more) is a concept that is critical to the maintenance of a stable society. Societies that don‟t practice this have prison systems that are bursting at the seams. If you don‟t believe me, go with me tomorrow night and I‟ll show you the result of a penal system that has replaced restoration and restitution with imprisonment. Let‟s say a man steals $30,000.00 and blows it all on a two month crack binge. He is sentenced to 12 years in prison and a $4,000.00 fine. Does that punishment bring about restoration and restitution? No. Has he paid his debt to society? No.

There was a time in our country when we had debtor‟s prisons. In fact, they lasted up into the late 1850‟s. Debtor‟s prison was where a person spent time until he could literally “pay his debt to society.” If you declared bankruptcy, that was where you went! Bankruptcy was not considered an “unfortunate reality of tough financial times.” It was considered theft, and sometimes you were branded with the letter “T” on your thumb to let everyone know you were a thief.1 Restoration and restitution were important concepts, as well as strong deterrents.

Now, is it a coincidence that our country‟s prison system exploded with growth at the same time we switched from a philosophy of restitution to a philosophy of rehabilitation? Not at all. There was a philosophical change in America‟s penal system that said the solution to crime is rehabilitation. The thinking was that more than anything else, the criminal needs
1 http://www.ihatedebt.com/ALookatDebt/TheHistoryofDebtinAmerica/index.php

education. Education and rehabilitation are not deterrents to crime. Restoration and restitution are!

The reason I‟m taking the time to show you this is because the trespass offering has this concept built into it. It illustrates God‟s wisdom in two ways. First of all, the potential criminal has to decide if the risk is worth it – which is actually a deterrent to the crime. He has to weigh the benefit of the crime with the risk of getting caught and being worse off after the crime than he is in his current situation. In addition to this, we see God expanding his focus from the broken relationship between God and man to the broken relationship between man and man.

So, what does all this mean for us today? There are at least two layers of application we can make. On the surface level, we can see the importance of dealing with sin at a much deeper level than we are accustomed to. The trespass offering digs deep and addresses sin at the level of motives and deterrents and restored relationships. One of these days I want to speak about the foolishness of “time out” as a child rearing device. I spent six hours yesterday with 1,900 men whom had been given a “time out” by our penal system – and the sad thing is that they aren‟t being dealt with at the heart level like the trespass offering demands.

But at a deeper level, how can we humans be restored to a right relationship with God? Where do we go to find not only an adequate payment for our sins but also 20% more? This is why the writer of Hebrews says, “For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.” So where do we go? We go to Jesus! The sacrificial death of Jesus more than covered our sins.