Leviticus 6:24-3024And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, 25Speak unto Aaron and to his sons, saying, This is the law of the sin offering: In the place where the burnt offering is killed shall the sin offering be killed before the Lord: it is most holy. 26The priest that offereth it for sin shall eat it: in the holy place shall it be eaten, in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation. 27Whatsoever shall touch the flesh thereof shall be holy: and when there is sprinkled of the blood thereof upon any garment, thou shalt wash that whereon it was sprinkled in the holy place. 28But the earthen vessel wherein it is sodden shall be broken: and if it be sodden in a brazen pot, it shall be both scoured, and rinsed in water. 29All the males among the priests shall eat thereof: it is most holy. 30And no sin offering, whereof any of the blood is brought into the tabernacle of the congregation to reconcile withal in the holy place, shall be eaten: it shall be burnt in the fire. (Leviticus 6:24‑30)
In Leviticus 4, there were two ways in which a sin offering was offered:
1. In the case of the sin offering for a priest or the whole congregation, the blood of the animal was carried into the holy place and sprinkled before the Lord, before the veil of the sanctuary. Of the blood, some was sprinkled seven times before the Lord, some was put on the horns of the altar of incense, and the rest was poured out at the bottom of the brazen altar. The bodies of these animals were carried outside the camp and burned after certain parts were taken off and burned on the brazen altar.
2. In the case of a ruler or one of the common people, the blood was put on the horns of the altar of burnt offering and all the blood was poured out at the bottom of the altar. In the law of the offering in the above-mentioned scripture, another detail is mentioned that was important. It was to be killed in the place where the burnt offering was killed and then the priest who offered it was to eat it in a holy place — in the court. Later it is mentioned that all the males among the priests had to eat of it.
In the first case (with the priest or the whole congregation), the matter was more serious in that the fellowship with God’s people as a whole was interrupted. In the priest it was because he was the people’s link with God.
The Priest Bore the Iniquity
It is particularly the second case on which we wish to meditate just now. In this case the offering had to be eaten by the priest in a holy place — the court of the tabernacle. In Leviticus 10:1717Wherefore have ye not eaten the sin offering in the holy place, seeing it is most holy, and God hath given it you to bear the iniquity of the congregation, to make atonement for them before the Lord? (Leviticus 10:17), Moses asks the sons of Aaron, “Wherefore have ye not eaten the sin offering in the holy place, seeing it is most holy, and God hath given it you to bear the iniquity of the congregation, to make atonement for them before the Lord?” The priest was not the one guilty of the sin before God, but by eating of the offering he made the whole matter his own and thus bore the iniquity of the congregation, to make atonement for them before the Lord. It was only through this priestly activity that atonement could be made. “The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, Thou wilt not despise” (Psa. 51:1717The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. (Psalm 51:17)).
When there is failure in another, it is easy to see what we think is the sin or difficulty and wash our hands of the matter, thinking in that way that we are not guilty. But if we profess relationship with God, our responsibility goes further. To eat something makes it our very own—it becomes part of us. When we, in spirit, eat the sin offering in the holy place, we fully identify with the sin, and in the holy presence of God we realize what it cost our Lord Jesus to make atonement for that sin. It is not isolating ourselves, but identifying in this way with the guilty.
Daniel Identified With the Guilty
Daniel, in spirit, even though not a priest, did this in identifying with his guilty people. There was no self-justification there, only justifying God and confession of “my sin and the sin of my people Israel” (Dan. 9:2020And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the Lord my God for the holy mountain of my God; (Daniel 9:20)). It was accompanied with real affliction of soul as indicated by fasting, sackcloth and ashes. Surely this must accompany such priestly activity: not feigned sorrow, but real sorrow produced by measuring in the holy presence of God what this has meant to our Savior on Calvary. Fasting is the attitude of denying ourselves. Sackcloth was the sign of inward mourning. Ashes speak of judgment that has been consummated.
The Spirit of the Lord Jesus
Our blessed Lord Jesus Christ carried with Him the same spirit. As the Son of God He was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners. Yet, when opening His public ministry, He came to John the Baptist to be baptized with the baptism of repentance. John, recognizing in Jesus the holy, spotless Lamb of God, forbade Him. But Jesus answered, “Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness” (Matt. 3:1515And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him. (Matthew 3:15)). In this way He identified with those guilty people who had repented. What beauty of moral perfection in our Lord Jesus we contemplate here! How much do we correspond in spirit to this? Then, when He was on that awful cross making atonement, He so fully took our sins that He called them His own (Psa. 69:55O God, thou knowest my foolishness; and my sins are not hid from thee. (Psalm 69:5)). Only thus could atonement be made.
We need to clarify that any priestly activity in which we may be occupied is not for atonement. That work has been done once for all by our Lord Jesus on the cross. But in spirit we need to know what it means to identify with one that is guilty and eat the sin offering in full recognition of the holiness of God. If there were more of such priestly activity alone before God, would there not be less of the confusion, shame and division that has come among His redeemed who are responsible for His testimony here below?
R. Thonney