Sacrifices - burnt, sin, guilt, grain, drink, peace,trespass, incense offering

[PeterJens]

We talk often about sacrifices only being for sin.

But we have a difference between

sin offering
guilt offering

Which seems to distinguish between the action of sin and the feeling of guilt
afterwards. It is a sin to do something wrong and then conceal it.

The Lord said to Moses: 2 “If anyone sins and is unfaithful to the Lord by deceiving a neighbor about something entrusted to them or left in their care or about something stolen, or if they cheat their neighbor, 3 or if they find lost property and lie about it, or if they swear falsely about any such sin that people may commit— 4 when they sin in any of these ways and realize their guilt, they must return what they have stolen or taken by extortion, or what was entrusted to them, or the lost property they found, 5 or whatever it was they swore falsely about. They must make restitution in full, add a fifth of the value to it and give it all to the owner on the day they present their guilt offering.
Lev 6:1-5

Sacrifices of thankgiving

Grain, drink, peace offerings, incense offering.

This is all very rich in colour and implication, which is interesting when
we often end up in a black and white language of sin, repentance, confession and
forgiveness, when it is actually more subtle, with sins that lead to death and those
which are related to people being upset or hurt by them.

If the Lord distinguished our sins and implications in the law in such detail, to dismiss
this detail in Christ seems to be denying the very intentions God has in His dealings
with our personal issues and rebellion.

 

[sevenseas]

Interesting post.

The Bible does indeed differentiate between different types of sin or transgression. And then there are also the sacrifices of thanksgiving as you noted.

The problem that may occur with lumping everything together, is that a person may possibly loose the awareness and seriousness of the death penalty for what they do.

Sin receives the death penalty and only God can provide a way out of that penalty and He has provided that way in His Son.

I honestly believe that unless a person has a good understanding of the Old Testament, they will miss out on understanding the New Testament as well as they could.

It seems to me, that the Old is a physical rendition of the spiritual truths in the New.

 

[royalscot]

We talk often about sacrifices only being for sin.

But we have a difference between

sin offering
guilt offering

Which seems to distinguish between the action of sin and the feeling of guilt
afterwards. It is a sin to do something wrong and then conceal it.

The Lord said to Moses: 2 “If anyone sins and is unfaithful to the Lord by deceiving a neighbor about something entrusted to them or left in their care or about something stolen, or if they cheat their neighbor, 3 or if they find lost property and lie about it, or if they swear falsely about any such sin that people may commit— 4 when they sin in any of these ways and realize their guilt, they must return what they have stolen or taken by extortion, or what was entrusted to them, or the lost property they found, 5 or whatever it was they swore falsely about. They must make restitution in full, add a fifth of the value to it and give it all to the owner on the day they present their guilt offering.
Lev 6:1-5

Sacrifices of thankgiving

Grain, drink, peace offerings, incense offering.

This is all very rich in colour and implication, which is interesting when
we often end up in a black and white language of sin, repentance, confession and
forgiveness, when it is actually more subtle, with sins that lead to death and those
which are related to people being upset or hurt by them.

If the Lord distinguished our sins and implications in the law in such detail, to dismiss
this detail in Christ seems to be denying the very intentions God has in His dealings
with our personal issues and rebellion.

thats why acts 10 and acts 15 make you whole post out dated, false. by facts.




he did, he called one jewish and one christian. two covenants, not a continuation of the old. but the start of a new. heb 9

he also gave acts 15 for gentile. that said there is no law.

if you dont have a law , or a temple of stone. then its getting a bit thin to anything else you say.

 

[PeterJens]

thats why acts 10 and acts 15 make you whole post out dated, false. by facts.
he did, he called one jewish and one christian. two covenants, not a continuation of the old. but the start of a new. heb 9
he also gave acts 15 for gentile. that said there is no law.
if you dont have a law , or a temple of stone. then its getting a bit thin to anything else you say.

You seem to have missed the point.
God does not lay out points because they are just for ceremony, but they are of interest to Him.

So the difference between a sin offering and a guilt offering seems to matter. So I am asking the
question as to why?

I ask also because we do not seem to have this difference explained in the new testament.
But maybe nobody has asked this question before?

 

[PeterJens]

Leviticus 5 - The Sin Offering and the Guilt Offering

This has an interesting emphasis on promising to do something and then failing being a sin
which needs to be confessed and dealt with.

 

[FreeNChrist]

"Under the old covenant, the priest stands and ministers before the altar day after day, offering the same sacrifices again and again, which can never take away sins. But our High Priest offered Himself to God as a single sacrifice for sins, good for all time. Then He sat down in the place of honor at God’s right hand." Heb. 10:11-12

 

[royalscot]

You seem to have missed the point.
God does not lay out points because they are just for ceremony, but they are of interest to Him.

So the difference between a sin offering and a guilt offering seems to matter. So I am asking the
question as to why?

I ask also because we do not seem to have this difference explained in the new testament.
But maybe nobody has asked this question before?

you need a temple of stone. and since christian s are given the holy spirit.

you missed something, that would be your idea of sin. and context to along side your first post, only shows , your in want to a new covenant.

4 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace Galatians 5: Christ Has Set Us Free

 

[PeterJens]

"Under the old covenant, the priest stands and ministers before the altar day after day, offering the same sacrifices again and again, which can never take away sins. But our High Priest offered Himself to God as a single sacrifice for sins, good for all time. Then He sat down in the place of honor at God’s right hand." Heb. 10:11-12

Amen.

Now if you have a desire to walk in a pleasing way before the Lord, you would also
be interested in what His concerns are as well. But maybe this idea has passed you by.

 

[Grace777x70]

.............things we see that makes us do this...

 

[MadebyHim]

You seem to have missed the point.
God does not lay out points because they are just for ceremony, but they are of interest to Him.

So the difference between a sin offering and a guilt offering seems to matter. So I am asking the
question as to why?

I ask also because we do not seem to have this difference explained in the new testament.
But maybe nobody has asked this question before?

Wouldn't one be because of the other? It seems they are braided, twisted together.

 

[MadebyHim]

it seems guilt and sin go hand in hand Peterjens.

 

[royalscot]

if jesus came to set the prisoner free,what prison did he set you free from, then why are you still looking at sin.
that s the strange thought, given a devils advocate , would want to keep you in prison. what is the point of context if it keep you in prison.

with no bible, proof to why it keeps you in prison. is the sorry point. for the reader.

 

[PeterJens]

it seems guilt and sin go hand in hand Peterjens.

I agree, that was my thinking.

According to the except I read from Leviticus 5, there was a distinction between
taking oaths and breaking them, and making something unclean which should have been holy.

Guilt was being given to making that which is Holy unclean, which needed addressing
separately from sinful actions.

 

[sevenseas]

Is there something wrong with discussing the law?

Personally, I think it makes the New Covenant all the more beautiful

I know I certainly gained more appreciation for all Jesus accomplished when I studied it

 

[PeterJens]

Is there something wrong with discussing the law?
Personally, I think it makes the New Covenant all the more beautiful
I know I certainly gained more appreciation for all Jesus accomplished when I studied it

What strikes me is the emphasis the Lord put on defilement.
Even when Jesus was put on trial, the sanhedrin did not want to enter the courts of Pilate
because it would make the defiled, which would take days to get purified again.

We often loose our real sense of entering Gods presence being so precious.

To think the throne of glory will listen to our calls.
Where is our focus? On what can be achieved or on just making do with what we have got?

 

[PeterJens]

.............things we see that makes us do this...

Let me put this emotional statement in true context.
The Lord of Hosts brought the temple system to mankind to teach us about how we
should approach Him and appreciate what is appropriate and what is not.

Now it is all His work. To show disdain to His work is to sin against Him.
It is also especially worse when the person doing it claims spiritual maturity, but it
demonstrates their true allegiance is not to honour the Lords ways.

Lord, may you forgive those who are blind and do not see, who do not aspire to seek
our your ways and see your wisdom in a sinful world. We in our arrogance take for
granted what you have given us in Christ and like spoilt children want to desecrate
the Holy place, not understanding our actions.
Teach us Lord how to bring your Kingdom to our homes and world in which we dwell,

In Jesus's Name, Amen

 

[eternally-gratefull]

People forget God set up Isreal to be nation. Nations have laws. These laws are needed for order and peace. otherwise, there is anarchy.

God set up these laws. He made different punishments for different crimes. The crimes which affected society more (like murder) had the most severe punishment (usually death) The crimes which lead to less of a total affect on society, usually had less punishments.

But to try to set these up as to say there are differing punishments by God on differing sins. Is just rejecting the word of God. who said AL have sinned and fall short (no different sins) and that of we even break the least of all Gods commands, we are found guilty of the whole law. Even moses, when he gave the law. made the children of Israel confirm an oath, that they would confirm every letter of that law. and obey every letter of that law. Which means that if they broke even one command, They would be guilty of that law. and as Paul said under the curse of the law.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Is there something wrong with discussing the law?

Personally, I think it makes the New Covenant all the more beautiful

I know I certainly gained more appreciation for all Jesus accomplished when I studied it

No there is not.

WHat is wrong is when people take the law out of context.

 

[Grace777x70]

People that insult others are defiling them -

" But maybe this idea has passed you by."

This is the reason not to interact with those that continually do this sort of nonsense.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

The almighty God brought the sacrificial/tabernacle system not to show us HOW to approach him, But how impossible it is because of sin to approach him. (look at all a high priest had to do just to enter his presence, and even then many had to be pulled out because they died the moment they entered Gods inner sanctuary)


That is exactly what it means (saying it is how to approach God) to say people take the law out of context.