Does Leviticus 5:11 – 13 Teach Forgiveness Without Shedding of Blood?

Abstract

Leviticus chapter 5 is concerned with the trespass-offering. The difference between thetrespass offering and the sin-offering most likely lay not so much in the sacrifices themselves,and the management of them, as in the occasions of the offering of them. They were bothintended to make atonement for sin; but the former was more general, this applied to someparticular instances. Thus, concerning the trespass, if a man commits a sin: (i) In concealinghis knowledge, when he is adjured (v. 1). (ii) In touching an unclean thing (v. 2, 3). (iii) Inswearing (v. 4). (iv) In embezzling the holy things (v. 14-16). (v) In any sin of infirmity (v.17-19). Some other cases there are, in which these offerings were to be offered (chaps 6:2-4;14:12; 19:21; Num. 6:12). And concerning the trespass-offerings, (i) Of the flock (v. 5, 6).(ii) Of fowls (v. 7-10). (iii) Of flour (v. 11-13; but chiefly a ram without blemish (v. 15, etc.).This paper focuses on trespass offering of flour (v. 11-13). Provision is here made for thepoor of the people of God, and the pacifying of their consciences under the sense of guilt.Those that were not able to bring a lamb might bring for a sin-offering a pair of turtle-dovesor two young pigeons; however, if any were so extremely poor that they were not able toprocure these so often as they would have occasion, they might bring a an ephah of fine flourfor a sin offering, and this should be accepted. Therefore, it seems that the expense of the sinoffering was brought lower than that of any other offering, to teach the reader that no man'spoverty shall ever be a bar in the way of his/her forgiveness. The poorest of all may haveatonement made for them, if it be not their own fault. Furthermore, this paper seeks to findout whether the passage under consideration teaches that forgiveness can be obtained withoutthe shedding of blood or not.