LEVITICUS 4
This chapter sets forth exercises which we all have to take up personally, for James tells us that “we all often offend”. Wilful sins are not referred to here, for God would not contemplate His people sinning wilfully or presumptuously. Wilful sin in Scripture is really apostasy. I believe the working of the will is typified in leprosy (Leviticus 13, Leviticus 14), and when leprosy breaks out we do not know what the issue may be. Healing can only be brought about by God’s sovereign mercy and power. In such a case man is powerless. Here it is, “If a soul shall sin through inadvertence against any of the commandments of Jehovah in things that ought not to be done, and do any of them”. It refers to sins which are committed through unwatchfulness, through lack of proper exercise in the fear of God. The loins have been ungirded, and what is of nature has been allowed, leading to something being done that ought not to be done. The most serious [p. 40] aspects of such a case are presented first — the sin of the priest that is anointed, of the whole assembly, and of a prince. There are degrees of exercise according to the greater or less responsibility of the position held by the one who sins.
“The priest that is anointed” is the first case considered. It is very sad when such a one sins “according to the trespass of the people”. For a saint who has known what it is to be anointed — to have the Spirit, and to be in priestly relations with God as one possessed of holy knowledge — to forget, as it were, the anointing, and act wrongly like a common person, is very serious.
Do we always remember the peculiar and blessed place that we have as being anointed? I like to remind myself sometimes as I go along that I belong to the Man at God’s right hand! I am of that Man, and I have His Spirit! Paul, referring to the saints, says, “So also is the Christ” (1 Corinthians 12: 12); the saints are the anointed company down here. “Praying in the Holy Spirit” (Jude 20) implies that we have a priestly place with God, and that our desires do not move outside the region of the Spirit. There is no sinning there. Jude contemplates the possibility of God’s called ones, preserved in Jesus Christ, being kept without stumbling. The second epistle to the Corinthians speaks of the saints as anointed by God, and the anointing confers priestly capability. For such to sin is a very grave defection. It is — for the moment, at any rate — a bringing into evidence of the fallen man, not the Man at the right hand of God. It is not merely that I have done wrong and I am sorry for it — a man of the world would go as far as that — but my deep concern is that I have allowed something [p. 41] of the man who is under judgment with God. And the sin of a priest has an additionally grave character, inasmuch as it directly affects the service of God, and the whole assembly suffers in relation to that service. So that, in its issues, it is much more than a personal fault.
It is noticeable that in connection with the priest it does not speak — as in the case of the assembly, the prince or one of the people — of his sin becoming known. This supposes, in their case, a certain interval between the sin and its becoming known to them as such. But the omission of this statement when the priest is in question seems to suggest that the anointed priest would realize at once, intuitively, that he had done what he ought not. This implies a holy sensitiveness in the priest that one would covet. It implies such habitual nearness to God that if, in an unguarded moment, one has done what ought not to be done, it is felt at once, and the soul immediately turns to God about it. My impression is that the degree of a believer’s holiness — the degree in which he has truly known what it is to be an anointed priest — can be measured by his sensitiveness as to sin.
When there have been actions or words or feelings that are of the flesh it is often some time before there is any true movement of self-judgment. This indicates that nearness has not been known or preserved, or the distance that sin produces would be more quickly and keenly felt. In such a case the believer has got away — as to the condition of his soul — from his place with God as an anointed priest, though he may have formerly known that holy and near position and character. If we are not habitually near to God we may go on a long time with what is [p. 42] really of the flesh, and not perceive it. It may need a sharp word to our consciences, or perhaps a sharp stroke of discipline, to bring it home to us. “Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I keep thy word”. Our true liberty is to judge what is of the flesh inwardly, so that, though it is fully discerned by us and we are humbled by discerning it, it does not come out to be a public reproach.
If a priest sins he cannot go on with the service of God, but to a sensitive priestly heart restoration is not necessarily a long process. It is indeed a grave fault for such a one to sin “according to the trespass of the people”, but the scripture supposes that he is marked by the sensitiveness which properly belongs to the priestly anointing. It is very sad if this sensitiveness is lacking; such a condition really belies the character of the anointing.
The moment there is the consciousness of having sinned the divine provision is available. Christ is at once introduced in sin-offering character. Such is grace — the blessed grace of our God! He does not say that the priest must repent deeply for three months, and then, when he has truly and deeply judged himself, he may bring a sin-offering! That might be our way, but it is not God’s. Deep and holy and divine self-judgment is not brought about by thinking of the sin, but by apprehending Christ in relation to it, and by taking up with God what it has cost Him to deal with it and put it away. Christ is available through divine grace. Let us never forget that! Let us turn to God at once when there has been a movement of the flesh, and avail ourselves of Christ in sin-offering character! Let us beware of Satan’s effort to keep sin before us, and darken our [p. 43] souls by it, and hinder us from turning to God so that we may learn the value of Christ in relation to it!
The first movement in regard to the sin of a believer is on the part of Jesus Christ the righteous. We have Him as “a patron with the Father” (1 John 2: 1). His advocacy results in suitable exercises being produced in the soul of the one who has sinned, and those exercises are presented typically in Leviticus 4. We take them up in the light of the grace that is in “Jesus Christ the righteous”, and it is really the fruit of His present service in grace that we are able to take them up. To be carried in that way through the exercise of a chapter like this — humbling though it surely is to us — leads to great growth in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. If I have sinned it is very humbling to me, but God intends to make Christ better known and more appreciated in my heart, through that sin. It is the exposure to me of what I am, but if I turn to God about it He will use it to enlarge my knowledge and appreciation of Christ. In the case of the priest a large apprehension of Christ is suggested — “a young bullock without blemish”. The special seriousness of sin in such a one has its answer in a specially large apprehension of Christ in relation to it.
The sin-offering in each case is brought to the entrance of the tent of meeting, or to the place of the burnt-offering. This seems to indicate a readiness to be perfectly open and candid about the matter. If I have really learned something more of the value of Christ through my sin I can afford to be quite open about it. I do not mean that it is necessary, or desirable, to speak of one’s wrong-doing to everybody, but there is a preparedness to do so if any occasion for [p. 44] it arises. It is just the opposite to the attempt to cover up things that we may appear to be better than we really are. If saints were more prepared to own things which they know in their consciences to be wrong it would greatly promote fellowship. Of course, all must be “before Jehovah” to have true moral value.
Think of the impression that would be made on all Israel as the anointed priest was seen bringing his sin-offering “to the entrance of the tent of meeting before Jehovah”! It is true that he has sinned, but he has something greater before him than his sin. He is “before Jehovah”, and he is in possession, typically, of a large apprehension of Christ. His soul is filled with the apprehension of Christ in relation to his sin. Do you not think that would take away the fleshly reluctance to own the wrong that he had done? I do not think Peter minded his fault being put on record for the church. As to Moses and David, it is themselves who have told, in the most public way, the story of their faults. This shows how completely they were morally apart from the sin by self-judgment, so that they had no thought of preserving their own reputation.
If I became possessed before God of Christ in sin-offering character I am sure it would give candour and transparency. I should be ready to listen to James, who says, “Confess therefore your offences to one another, and pray for one another, that ye may be healed” (James 5: 16). If we were more free to make confession of faults it would lead to more prayer for one another. The confessional is the devil’s travesty of this, designed to bring people under the power of a false priesthood. James says, “Confess ... to one another”. Those who go to “confession” are as much entitled to hear the confession of the so-called “priest” as he is to hear theirs.
If I have done wrong there is moral elevation in owning it, but the flesh regards it as degradation. If I have apprehended Christ in sin-offering character in relation to my sin it will deliver me from the pride of the flesh that would refuse to acknowledge the wrong.
The priest laying his hand on the bullock’s head and slaughtering it expresses the sense that he has of the necessity for Christ and His death in relation to the sin committed. It is a deep exercise to have to own to God that one has done something for which Christ had to die — one has given place to the man He died to remove. It may be I have spoken a hasty word or allowed a wrong feeling! Where did it come from? The man in Psalm 51 traces his sin to its root. “Behold, in iniquity was I brought forth, and in sin did my mother conceive me”. My sin is the manifestation of the fallen and sinful man whom Christ died to remove. We are not right with God until we acknowledge this.
Christ has borne the judgment of sin; He has died to close the history sacrificially of the man who is only evil continually. If I have allowed something of that man to come into evidence, God would use the very exercise occasioned by this to give me a new lesson in the appreciation of Christ and His death. The death of the bullock, the blood, the burning outside the camp signify the complete removal from before God in sacrificial death and judgment of the man after the flesh. In being brought to appreciate the death of Christ we are brought into harmony with God as to the sin, and as to the source from which it proceeded, and as to the way God has dealt with it.
[p. 46] We learn to hate sin; it becomes only a grief to us. Jabez prayed “that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me! And God brought about what he had requested” (1 Chronicles 4: 10). When evil is only a grief to us, because of what it cost Christ to remove it, we can return consciously to priestly nearness. Perhaps this is the reason why it is not said of the priest that is anointed, as it is of the other cases, that his offering makes atonement for him, or that his sin shall be forgiven. In bringing his offering the priest returns consciously to priestly relations with God. That involves atonement and forgiveness; the greater includes the less. The priest takes up his holy service with a deepened spirituality, as having acquired an apprehension of Christ in relation to what is in himself which he had not before.
The priest brings the blood into the tent of meeting, and sprinkles it seven times “before Jehovah before the veil of the sanctuary”. Not once or twice, but seven times! Indicating how God would have the soul take up before Him a sense of the perfection of the efficacy of the blood of Christ to remove the stain from before Him of what has now come on the conscience. This is not being washed again in the blood, or a re-application of the blood to us, as some people unscripturally teach. As to justification, or the non-imputation of sins, the believer is “perfected in perpetuity” by the one offering of Christ; his sins and his lawlessnesses God will never remember any more to lay them to his charge. See Hebrews 9, Hebrews 10. The efficacy of the blood never diminishes or changes on God’s side, and the believer is in all its sin-cleansing efficacy in perpetuity. But when he sins he cannot go on with God apart from moral exercises by which [p. 47] he apprehends afresh with God the precious and holy value of the blood of Christ.
The blood put “on the horns of the altar of fragrant incense” would intimate that the offerer returns to liberty and confidence in prayer, which he could not do while his heart condemned him. He does not ignore his sin, but it has led — through grace — to an apprehension of Christ which sets him free with God.
I have heard that a broken bone when healed is stronger in that place than anywhere else, and this seems to be suggested as the fruit of a sin-offering exercise by David asking “that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice” (Psalm 51: 8).
Then all the blood of the bullock being poured out “at the bottom of the altar of burnt-offering” seems to provide a basis, as it were, for the offering of the fat. The blood has so fully vindicated every righteous claim of the altar that the offerer can now get an apprehension of the excess. If CHRIST is known as the sin-offering, His value could not be limited to the removal of what is obnoxious to God. The very way it was done, and the excellence of Him who offered Himself, were such that infinite satisfaction and good pleasure were secured for God. That is the fat. It forms, in a certain sense, a link with the burnt-offering. Restoration to full liberty with God is not complete until there is an apprehension of how the offering of Christ for sin has brought in delight for God. Instead of the moral corruption of the man who has come into evidence in the sin, and who has been sacrificially ended in the death of Christ, there is the supreme excellence of One delightful to God, and its holy fragrance. The priest would resume his service in the blessed consciousness of this.
[p. 48] If we have sinned, the way to get right with God, and to please God, is to avail ourselves of Christ as the sin-offering. Sometimes a great deal of the regret which is felt is not really “grief according to God”, but the mortification of wounded vanity. This may lead to a resolve to be more careful another time, but it does not lead to increased apprehension of Christ, and it does not put the soul right with God.
The complete consumption in holy judgment of what was offensive to God is seen typically in the burning of the whole bullock outside the camp. This implies a deep sense in the soul of God’s entire rejection of the man from whom the sin proceeded. The wrong thing done is traced to the root, as we may see in Psalm 51, and the soul is brought into harmony with God as to the character of the man after the flesh and as to the judgment which has come upon that man in the death and judgment-bearing of Christ. It is there that we really find “a clean place”, for the man of sin and shame and defilement is ended in a holy sacrifice, and the “ashes” speak of judgment eternally exhausted.
The case of the priest comes before that of “the whole assembly”, for priestly exercise and discernment would be needed to take right account of the sin of the whole assembly, so that the sin-offering as in view of priestly sensibilities and restoration of priestly service comes first. It remains for us to note the application of the same principles to the different cases which follow.
The sin of “the whole assembly” is a very serious matter, because, like the sin of the anointed priest, it interferes with the service of God. If the whole assembly sins against “any of all the commandments [p. 49] of Jehovah in things which should not be done”, it must affect the service of God. The thing may be “hid from the eyes of the congregation”, but it is not hid from the eyes of the Lord, and instead of that being before Him which is for His pleasure, there is that which is an offence to Him.
I doubt whether we are sufficiently exercised about the sin of “the whole assembly”. Revelation 2 and Revelation 3 shows us the sin of the whole assembly. It is hid from the eyes of many, but it has really “become known”; the Lord has made it known. Would any one venture to say that the present state of “the whole assembly” gives God pleasure? No, it is an offence to Him. It has left its first love, it has ceased to be in subjection to Jesus as Lord, it does not hold Christ as Head, nor does it own in a practical way the blessed reality of the presence of the Holy Spirit. There is an order established generally which is of man and not of God. The mustard seed has become a great tree. All this is a very grave sin, and the Lord has made it known that there might be opportunity to repent. In the epistles to five of the assemblies (Revelation 2, Revelation 3) there is a call to repent. “The elders of the assembly” have had the opportunity to come with the sin-offering and lay their hands on its head. If there is no repentance the Lord will assuredly remove the candlestick, and spue the assembly out of His mouth. Things are just on the eve of this being done.
Many will admit that things are not what they ought to be, but will excuse them on the ground of human infirmity, or errors in judgment, or want of light. The Lord Himself, in grace, takes account of the sin in Leviticus 4 as done “inadvertently”. But the [p. 50] plain fact is that all the things in the Christian profession of which the Lord disapproves are SIN. Place is given everywhere to the man who was condemned at the cross. Whatever is wrong in the christian profession, and contrary to the commandments of the Lord, springs from man after the flesh. The one who brings the sin-offering judges this in the light of the fact that Christ bore the judgment of that man and died to bring him to an end before God. In the recognition of this he can call on the Lord out of a pure heart, as morally apart, by the death of Christ, from that man. But this makes the sin of “the whole assembly” a very grave matter, and when we see it in this light we must take the path of separation.
I would put it to any heart that loves the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity, Would you like to go on with something of which He disapproves? If the congregation and the elders of the assembly will not bring the sin-offering of the congregation, the faithful individual must. And how could we call on the Lord out of a pure heart if we go on with things which He has made known to us to be sin? Hence 2 Timothy comes in. We are to withdraw from iniquity, to separate from vessels to dishonour, and to turn away from those who have a form of piety but deny its power.
Those who own the sin of the whole assembly, and avail themselves of Christ as the “sin-offering of the congregation”, can truly “call on the Lord out of a pure heart”; and I do not doubt that such can know something of forgiveness in an assembly sense. If the spiritual features of the assembly are found amongst saints in some measure, and the service of [p. 51] God, and the enjoyment of assembly privilege, it is blessed evidence of forgiveness and of restoring mercy. I think many have tasted something of the reality of this.
In the early part of the last century many godly persons felt deeply the sin of the assembly; not merely their personal failures but that “the whole assembly” had departed from God’s thoughts. Priestly exercise was brought about as to what was suitable to God, and much light was given as to His ways and purposes, and as to Christ and the assembly. This led to a judgment of things in the light of the death of Christ, and to a movement of separation, and the result has been a revival, in measure, of the true spiritual features of the assembly, and of the service of God, and of the enjoyment of assembly privilege.
There is such a thing as assembly exercise as well as individual exercise, and it is deeper than anything purely individual could be, because it is connected with what is suitable to God in His house. So that for saints who are professedly walking together as owning the truth and principles of the assembly to “do somewhat against any of all the commandments” of the Lord — however inadvertently done — is a serious matter. But grace has anticipated the possibility of such a thing, and has made provision for it. The sin-offering for the assembly corresponds with that for the anointed priest; the exercise in these two cases seems to be measured by the divine estimate of the sin, and the apprehension of Christ which meets it is a very full one. In the following cases there is not with each the same degree of self-judgment, or of apprehension of Christ; it is according to the measure and depth of exercise with each. But in the case of [p. 52] the anointed priest and the assembly a divine measure of exercise is called for, having its answer in a large apprehension of Christ.
We cannot go on carelessly with the things of God. There is a tendency to make light of things which are really movements of the flesh, but if we make light of such things God does not. “I will be hallowed in them that come near me, and before all the people I will be glorified” (Leviticus 10: 3). We cannot do that which should not be done, and go on with the service of God as if nothing had happened. There must be self-judgment, and the sin-offering brought. But grace has provided that which will fully and divinely adjust the whole matter, and grace would use even the sin to deepen our self-knowledge, and to give us enlarged apprehension of Christ.
“A prince” or “ruler” represents one prominent in the congregation — one who has cared for the order of the people of God. It is more serious for such to sin than for “one of the people of the land”, and therefore it calls for a stronger and more energetic apprehension of Christ in sin-offering character to secure forgiveness and restoration. One who has been in any way prominent amongst the people of God must have got his place by having certain moral qualities or spiritual formation. He would be a greater man morally than “the people of the land”; otherwise his place would have been only fleshly pretension. But I have no doubt this scripture contemplates a true “prince”, not a fleshly pretender. When the sin of such comes to his knowledge he gives evidence that he is a “prince” by bringing a “male” offering. He has a more vigorous apprehension of [p. 53] Christ, and therefore a deeper self-judgment, than “one of the people of the land”.
In the case of one who has been a “prince” this would be justly looked for in view of restoration of confidence and fellowship, when his sin had been such as to interfere with these. The offering must be in proportion to the offerer. In a “prince” God would look for such an apprehension of Christ as would give great energy to self-judgment. Such would not spare or screen himself in any way. The spiritual energy in which he would judge himself would go beyond anything that his brethren might require. His exercises would give them an insight into soul-experiences which would deepen God’s work in their souls.
David is the great example in Scripture of a “prince” who sinned; it is very instructive for us to observe the sin-offering exercises of David. They are fully detailed for us in what are called the penitential Psalms (Psalm 6; Psalm 32; Psalm 38; Psalm 51; Psalm 102; Psalm 130; Psalm 143). These Psalms are not only an encouragement to souls under exercise, but they give us an insight into experiences which are perhaps beyond our own moral depth. They minister to self-knowledge, and to the knowledge of God. We should carefully ponder them in connection with the sin-offering. Each one was written by a “prince”.
Christ is always available as the sin-offering, and the sooner we avail ourselves of Him the better. It is good to be so established in grace that when we sin we avail ourselves at once of Christ as the sin-offering. God looks for an apprehension of Christ as sin-offering in proportion to the spiritual capacity of the individual. What is spoken of in Scripture as sinning wilfully is turning away from Christ — [p. 54] deliberately turning away from the sin-offering as apostates do. If a man does that there is no other remedy available; there is nothing left to bring him to repentance.
Grace is the true power of holiness. Grace never excuses sin or makes light of it, but it shows me the holy One of God going to the cross and being made sin. In His unutterable anguish and suffering I learn what sin is before God, and that it has been judged in Him that I might learn to judge it in myself.
If the sin of a believer is of such a nature as to suspend the confidence and fellowship of his brethren, that confidence cannot be restored without evidence that he has judged himself. Two birds or a handful of flour would not suffice or be accepted, if a man ought to bring a sheep! A female goat is accepted from “one of the people of the land”, but a “prince” must bring a male. The measure of one’s self-judgment is the measure in which we have apprehended Christ as the sin-offering, and in a “prince” God looks for this to be an energetic exercise. It is not saying lightly, “I am sorry”. What a profound depth of self-judgment appears in the Psalms we have referred to! They are the exercises of a “prince” who sinned, and they have become moral instruction for all the people of God. We see there a character and energy of self-judgment that is wonderful, and as we look into greater depths of experimental self-knowledge in another than we have sounded in ourselves, it shows us what we are. We are thus morally deepened, and we get a true sense of what Christ died for. When a man really gets to the root of things, as David did, he has done with making excuses.
The blood being put on the horns of the altar of [p. 55] burnt-offering, and the fat burned on the altar, links the sin-offering with the burnt-offering. I do not think anyone would go truly through the exercise of the sin-offering with God without reaching the burnt-offering. Psalm 51 is a deep sin-offering exercise, but it ends with the thought of the burnt-offering, and God doing good to Zion and building the walls of Jerusalem. It would not be like God to leave us merely with the negative thought of being relieved of the sin. We do not leave God’s presence without getting a sense of the sweet odour of Christ in burnt-offering character. We are not only in perfect clearance from sin, but we are in divine acceptance. And the thought of good being done to Zion, would suggest that every sin-offering exercise contributes to the strength and blessing of the assembly. The experience of the one who brings his sin-offering — what he has acquired of Christ in relation to his exercise — results in a contribution to the good of the assembly. And the mention of the peace-offering (verses 26, 31) would seem to be suggestive of the restoration of the privilege of fellowship with the people of God. If a man is really right with God he will be put right with his brethren also.
If a brother has sinned God would encourage him to avail himself of Christ as the sin-offering. That is the first thing to be concerned about. If he comes into the apprehension of Christ and of His death in relation to his sin he will judge himself. He will then be a spiritually deepened man — a “converted” or “restored” man (Luke 22: 32) — and he will be available, like Peter, for the comfort and strengthening of his brethren. The power of God in grace is such that one who has sinned can be fully restored to the [p. 56] confidence of the brethren, and made a greater help to them than he was before. This shows what God is, and the better we know God the more qualified we shall be to help in the restoration of those who sin. But this is priestly work. It requires that we should eat the sin-offering for our brethren (Leviticus 6). In this way we make the sin our own. Indeed we can never think before God of the sin of a brother or sister without realizing that it is a mirror in which we can see what we are ourselves. But in eating the sin-offering we also realize what the sin has cost Christ and how His death alone could remove it. Then we can take up advocacy and pray for our brother. In 1 John Jesus Christ the righteous is the Advocate, and at the end of the epistle the saints are put in the place of advocacy: “If any one see his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life, for those that do not sin unto death” (1 John 5: 16). If you pray for a brother you have a moral title to go to him, and to speak to him as one who has made his sin your own. One who has done so will have moral power.
Little needs to be added as to the sin-offering of “one of the people of the land”, save to note that the offerer in this case brings typically a weaker apprehension of Christ than I the “prince”; he brings a female goat or sheep. It is not that his sin is more easily atoned for, or that anything less than the full value of the death of Christ could atone for it. But we are occupied in these chapters with Christ and His death as known and apprehended by the faith and affections of saints, and in this we cannot go beyond our measure. Perhaps the three classes [p. 57] spoken of in this chapter might answer in some way to John’s three grades of babes, young men, and fathers. God would not look for the measure of exercise in a babe that He would rightly look for in a father. But things have to be taken up in truth according to our measure. The soul has to avail itself of Christ, and to apprehend the import of His death so that there may be a true judgment of the root from which the sin proceeded. If I sin I am entitled, through infinite grace, to lay my hand upon Christ, and He is never far away. The sin-offering always lies at the door, as God said to Cain. Everything has been reached and judged in the death of Christ; it is for us to come into the apprehension of it. Then we not only judge ourselves rightly, but we get a blessed sense of forgiveness, and an enlarged appreciation of Christ.