9. The Trespass or Guilt Offering

In this lesson will be presented the trespass offering, more frequently called the guilt offering. This study will come from Leviticus 5:14-19; 6:1-7; 7:1-7 and Numbers 5:5-8. This study will explain the trespass offering, its peculiar ritual, and the obligations of strict justice it demands. The whole sacrifice was built around the concept of strict moral justice. It was the “eye for an eye” kind of justice that was demanded under the Law. Then we will look at Christ as the fulfillment of the guilt offering.

The trespass offering generally was commanded when an individual violated one of the last five of the Ten Commandments—the commands of a social nature. The sin offering was required of those who violated the first five—the commands that related to God’s personal nature. Trespasses violate God’s government, as particularly related to commandments six through ten.

The Hebrew Background
of the Trespass Offering
The Name

The name of the trespass offering was asham; literally meaning a guilt or a debt because all wrong doing creates moral responsibility and indebtedness. Those who trespassed could not be right before God until the wrong had been made fully right in the eyes of the individual who had been trespassed against.

This offering assumed that the wrong that was done to a neighbor broke the fellowship with God and, of course, with the people of Israel. Leviticus 6:2 says: “If anyone sins and is unfaithful to the Lord by deceiving his neighbor . . .” implying that all wrongs against the neighbor were also wrongs against God.

This was true because the trespass was a violation of His government. Such actions resulted in the individual’s loss of fellowship with God. He was spiritually a lost man. That means that he could not participate in any of the sacrifices or worship activities that took place at the Tabernacle. He was not a participant at worship; his worship was no longer acceptable to God. He was in a state of alienation. Restoration to fellowship on the part of that individual was required before he could be readmitted to religious functions and communion with God.

This Is a “Most Holy” Type Sacrifice

This sacrifice also belongs to the category of the “most holy sacrifices.” There is nothing sweet savor about this sacrifice as was characteristic of the burnt and peace offerings. The trespass offering belongs to the same category as the sin offering; that is, most holy in nature. Right relationships between Hebrews had to exist before an individual could be restored to a right relationship with God.

This Is an “Individual” Sacrifice

The trespass offering was offered only by individuals. There was no such thing as a collective trespass. It was not likely that every Hebrew would get up one morning and steal from every other Hebrew. Therefore, trespass offerings always involved the individual. There were no graded levels of responsibility in the trespass offering. Whether civil ruler, priest, king, or common man, the demands of justice were equal. This was also emphasized in the fact that there was only one animal that was allowed for the man who committed a trespass—a male sheep was always required.

There were no provisions for alternate animals for the poor man. Every trespass demanded the ram and only the ram. Such invariable demands seem to imply that poverty was no excuse for stealing or any other kind of social abuse.

Trespasses always implied the violation or invasion of the rights and the properties of another person. As was mentioned, it was not possible for the whole nation to simultaneously commit a trespass. There were national sin offerings. The great Day of Atonement was offered annually on behalf of the entire nation—with individual participation. But the trespass offering was never offered congregationally or by the nation as a whole.

Respect for Rights and Properties of Others Was Demanded

Under the Law, the rights and properties of other people had to be respected. Since God is one of those persons, then this law demanded that everyone respect His rights as well. It was normally considered that if an individual had trespassed or wronged God, he had to offer the sin offering. However, there is a trespass offering that is offered when an individual has wronged God. His first-fruit offerings, his claim on the tithe of everything must be respected, for after all, He is a person.

Maybe, for example, a man might eat some of the holy things that would belong to God or drink some of the drink offerings that had been give to Him (Leviticus 22:14-15). In Joshua 7:1, there is the example of the sin of Achan. He took a wedge of gold from the city of Ai—gold which God had already claimed for Himself. That was a case of stealing from God. In II Chronicles 28:22 the act of idolatry was a trespass against God; it deprived God of the worship He had a right to expect from His people.

In Malachi 3:8, God asks a very sobering question of the children of Israel. “Will a man rob God?” Quite evidently, the answer is “yes,” because that is exactly what Israel was doing in the days of Malachi. How could they rob from God? They could do so by failing to give the full tenth that was required of the first-fruits and of the animals. They could also do so by offering in sacrifice to God animals that were defective, wounded or about to die anyway. God, in the context of Malachi, said: “Try offering them to your governor! Would he be pleased with you? Would he accept you?” (Malachi 1:8). Acceptable sacrifices to God are those that respect His nature, and they are given from hearts that are in tune with the dignity of His person.

Trespasses Involving
Man to Man Violations

Leviticus 6:1ff explains that trespasses always involve the violation of the rights of another person. There are presented a few examples of some of the ways in which an individual might violate his neighbor’s rights.

Deceiving a Neighbor

The first example is deceiving a neighbor about something entrusted to him. In other words, the neighbor asked a man to take care of some of his possessions or maybe loaned him some possession. The man then abusively used his neighbor’s property. Maybe his livestock was entrusted to a neighbor, and the neighbor sold one of the cows or perhaps even ate the animal. That is abusing a neighbor’s property.

Falsely Representing Some Product

Another trespass might have been to unlawfully use possessions knowing that they belonged to someone else. Again, if something had been sold to someone and in the transaction the object sold was falsely represented, thus taking advantage of the other’s lack of knowledge—that was a trespass. It might have been a matter of a bargain or sale whereby another’s money or goods were abusively taken.

Stolen Properties

Another example of trespassing against a neighbor was involved in stealing property. Any deed by which another individual’s possessions were taken without payment or without consent was wrong. It was a trespass against a neighbor. Deuteronomy 27:17 says that removing one’s neighbor’s landmarks would be a trespass against him. In other words, the property line was marked by sign posts. The moving of the posts in such a way to gain part of the neighbor’s property was a subversive form of stealing.

Unpaid debt is another example of trespassing against your neighbor. In other words, when one owed his neighbor money and he had promised to pay him by a certain date, failure to meet that date was wrong. If the man did not have the money, generally the last person he wanted to see was his neighbor, but the first person he ought to see was the neighbor. From the moment the money was due, if it was not paid, then he was holding his neighbor’s money without his consent.

Cheating or Oppressing a Neighbor

An individual who would cheat his neighbor or oppress his neighbor by withholding wages from a man who had labored all day was committing a transgression. Sometimes it was necessary for a man to use his wages earned that day to buy the food that his family would eat that night. Again, a falling short of an agreement that had been made was a trespass. These are just some of the ways in which it would be possible, according to Leviticus 19:13ff, to take advantage of one’s neighbor. Taking advantage of his extreme condition of need would be abusing him. It was wrong to force him to sell something cheaper than its actual worth.

Finding Lost Property
and Not Returning It

If an individual was to find lost property and then was to take possession of it, use it, abuse it, lie about it and swear falsely about it—it was an abuse of your neighbor. It was a trespass. The owner was deprived abusively of his possession. The finder knew that it was not his. There was a general rule that if one found something and he did not know whose it was, he could be sure that it was not his. However, under the Law of Moses, a man had no right to claim it and use it as if it were his own. Deuteronomy 22:1-2 demanded that lost property must not be ignored. If one was to see his neighbor’s cattle straying, he was required to pen it and hold it until the neighbor came to seek after it, and then it had to be restored. In the meantime the finder had to treat that animal as he would one of his own.

Restitution and Satisfaction
Restitution of the Property Was the First Demand

The central theme of the trespass offering was strict justice. Restitution and satisfaction were demanded as a part of the ritual that preceded the atonement exercise of the trespass offering. Restitution demanded that the property first be restored. Numbers 5:7 says that he must make full restitution of the loss. If the owner was dead and a man had stolen from him and wanted to repent of the wrong that he did in the stealing, then he had to make restitution to God through the priest. He obviously could not make restitution to the dead man. So Numbers 5:8 says that he had to make restitution to God before the wrong was made right. Then after restitution, satisfaction was given.

Satisfaction Involves
an Added Amount

Satisfaction came about by adding one fifth of the value of the animal taken, the property destroyed or abused. That was twenty percent, a double tithe, that was added to the price of restoration. So restitution demanded that the animal or the property be restored and then twenty percent be added to that as a kind of addendum, an additional amount of money. Leviticus 5:15 tells us that the repayment and the twenty percent stood as a fine that was attached to the restitution. The double tithe had to be given according to the shekel of the sanctuary. That means that the payment was to be given from full wright shekels like those used in the animal tax of the Hebrew people.

The twenty percent was considered as recompense to the one damaged for the loss. The owner had been deprived of his possession and the employment and use of it. The guilty had to recognize no profit from wrongdoing. Then he had to appease the owner for the loss that was done to him and satisfy the demands of justice in the eyes of the individual who had been offended.

No Exception for Ignorance

Whether the sin was committed wittingly or unwittingly does not change the ordinance. It is difficult to believe that a man could steal his neighbor’s property, sell it abusively, lie about it when the neighbor asked him if he had seen it, and then swear falsely to the fact: “No, I haven’t seen it.” It would be difficult to believe that he could do that without intent. Quite evidently, this was a malicious, voluntary sin that was committed. Deceiving one’s neighbor was wrong, and so restitution and satisfaction had to be made.

Restitution and Satisfaction
Do Not Atone

When the restitution and satisfaction had been fully made the guilty man was right with his neighbor, but he was not yet right with God. Restitution restored the relationship on the social level, but only atonement could restore the relationship on a religious level. He had to offer the sacrifice of the trespass offering. Only then, according to Leviticus 5:16 and 6:7, “. . . he will be forgiven.”

Basis for the Trespass Offering

The trespass offering is based on the law of equal justice. It is the basis of the law that is called the “eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”—rigid, strict justice.

The Strict Justice of the Law

In Exodus 21:23, if there was a serious injury the Law demanded that the Hebrew take “. . . life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.” Leviticus 24:17-22 adds these: “fracture for fracture (that is, broken bone) . . . ,” and what he did to the other must be done to him.

Even in the Absence of Mercy

Deuteronomy 25:1-3 seems to establish punishment for the individual who had trespassed against his neighbor where no monetary value or property loss could be assessed. It is possible that the case dealt with slander, abusive language, or pettiness in dealings with one’s neighbor. In such cases, the individuals had to go to court before the judge or the priest. They would hand down the decision. The decision may have demanded some physical punishment. It was not of a monetary nature because there was nothing to be restored.

The individual might have received the imposition of corporal punishment in the form of lashes (stripes) with a whip. The limit of the stripes that could be given was forty, and they had to be administered in the presence of the judge. They were not to exceed forty stripes. The Jews generally stopped at thirty nine lest they exceeded the limit that was imposed. Less could be given, but not more. The reason they were not to exceed the forty stripes was to avoid degrading their brother in their own eyes. The purpose was not to make him appear vile. The purpose was for correction, not for vengeance. If an individual were to keep beating the individual that did him wrong beyond the forty stripes, then he evidently was set on personal vengeance.

All Claims Must Be Well Proven

Deuteronomy 19:15-19 insists that every man prove his claim against his neighbor.

“One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. If a malicious witness takes the stand to accuse a man of a crime, the two men involved in the dispute must stand in the presence of the LORD before the priests and the judges who are in office at the time. The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against his brother, then do to him as he intended to do to his brother. You must purge the evil from among you.”

Further Litigation by the Priest

Deuteronomy 17:8-13 addresses litigations which sometimes arose that were too difficult for brothers to settle. Some lawsuit or some assault was involved here. They could not settle the matter, and so they would go to the judge or the priest, they would inquire, and then they would vindicate the righteous and condemn the wicked. Then they would hand down the decision that had to be followed. The party involved had to act according to the decision that they gave. He could not turn to the right hand nor to the left hand. He had to meet the spirit of the law. This context says that the man who showed contempt for the judge or for the priest was acting foolishly and presumptuously. He was to respect the office they represented. They were ministering there to God, and their decisions represented God’s decision. The penalty was God’s decision. If anyone rejected God’s decision then that man was stoned to death! In that way, Israel purged itself of such presumptuous sin as rebellion against God’s judgments. God’s laws could not be ignored with impunity. All God’s judgments were righteous and had to be acted upon by all men who seek His favor.

Ritual of the Trespass Offering

Let us look at the stages of the ceremonial of the trespass offering. This is the only sacrifice in which the first stage is not that of the presentation. The demands of justice were to be met before the presentation of the animal for atonement was to be made. For a man could not be right before God when he was wrong before his neighbor.

Stage One

The first stage demanded justice because justice precedes the acceptance of atonement. As long as justice had not been vindicated, there could be no atonement. In this way, the individual had to make restitution in full, according to Numbers 5:7. Then satisfaction was to be made by adding the twenty percent fine—the additional amount as a fine to give satisfaction to the person who was abused by the trespass.

Stage Two

As in the sin offering, the second stage involved the confession of the specific trespass committed. It seems that the confession had to be publicly made. It is interesting to note that there was no laying on of the hand on the head of the victim in this sacrifice. The reason probably is attributed to the fact that the restitution and satisfaction had taken care of the major issues that were involved in the wrong done. Also, the open and public confession was an acknowledgment of the fact of the sin that had violated the neighbor’s rights. It stood as evidence that he wanted to make all things right.

Stage Three

In stage three, there was the slaying of the sacrifice, and that was done, of course, as in the sin offering and all of the other blood-shedding sacrifices. As before, there was the manifest conviction on the part of the individual that he was in agreement with God’s penal judgments against his trespass. In other words, he had to carry out the sacrificial slaying so that he could manifest in that way his agreement with heaven’s judgment against his wrong.

Stage Four

In stage four, the priest sprinkled the blood on the sides of the altar of burnt offerings. Interestingly enough, to atone for actions against God in the sin offering, the blood had to be sprinkled on the horns of the altar of burnt offerings or on the horns of the altar of sweet incense in the Holy Place. However, in this sacrifice, the blood was sprinkled around the base of the altar, the lower half of the altar, indicating that atonement was secondary. The restitution and satisfaction had taken care of the major issues of offended justice. The open and public confession of the trespass indicated that the individual was trying to right the wrong and that he had agreed with God’s judgment in the slaying of his sacrifice. Therefore, the sprinkling of the blood brought about what is called marginal atonement.

Stage Five

In stage five, the fat was removed from the sacrifice, placed upon the altar of the burnt offerings and incensed or fumed to God. Once again, as in the fat of the sin offering, this would go up before God as His “sweet savor” portion of the sacrifice. It is evident that atonement had been made, forgiveness had been given and fellowship had been restored as God expressed His pleasure by accepting the fat as sweet savor. It smelled good to God when His people had done wrong and then righted the wrong and returned in repentance seeking fellowship with God. God grants it. They are forgiven. Only after atonement had been accepted did the fat become sweet savor.

Stage Six

The last stage of this sacrifice involved the disposition of the body. As in the sin offering, so also is the trespass offering. Leviticus 7:7 says that the law of the sin offering and the law of the trespass offering are the same. There is one law for both of them. The priest who was officiating at the altar received the sacrificial body as a gift from God. It was to be eaten in the courtyard of the Tabernacle (Leviticus 7:6). Once again, God was seen celebrating and hosting a festive banquet for His priests. They had been participant in the processes of restoration of a man who had strayed from God and was restored to fellowship. All the priests of the Levitical tribe could participate in the feast.

Lessons
From the Trespass Offering

There are some major lessons that must be learned from the trespass offering. Perhaps the most important lesson to be learned is that a man can trespass against God. He can rob God by depriving Him of the worship, service and offerings of his life, substance that God rightfully demands. In the sin offering, it is faith that a man expresses toward God’s willingness to forgive his sin when the proper sacrifice is made. But in the trespass offering, it seems to be that repentance is the major issue for the offender. He must bring forth the fruits that are worthy of repentance (Matthew 3:8). Faith is demanded in the trespass offering as well as the sin offering. But the trespass offering demands more than simple faith. It demands repentance.

Another lesson we learn from the trespass offering is that with the sacrifice or without the sacrifice a man is not right with God until he has made things right with his neighbor. One cannot be right with his neighbor with his neighbor’s money still in his pocket.

It does not matter what station an individual occupies, what office he holds or what economic level he occupies; that does not in any way attenuate his guilt. God’s justice and righteousness are to be defended in the trespass offering. The priest or the judge will hand down God’s decision; a man must bow himself to that decision or else he dies.

A beautiful lesson to be learned from the trespass offering is found in Matthew 5:23-24. Jesus said, “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.” Evidently, you have trespassed against your brother. Taking care of the demands of justice must precede acceptable atonement sacrifices before God.

Then Jesus adds in verses 25-26: “Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still with him on the way, or he may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may by thrown into prison. I tell you the truth, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.” Jesus is building the moral demands from the passages demanding strict justice in the Law of Moses.

Jesus insists that it is best to give in to the initial demands of the offended neighbor as he evaluates the damage. For if the matter goes to the judge or priest, then their decision could be more rigid. Whatever the judge’s decision, it must be accepted or face the penalty of death. If the offender does not have the resources to pay, then he will become as an indentured servant, perhaps with his entire family, to the one he offended until the debt is fully paid.

Jesus Christ Is
Our Trespass Offering

Quite evidently, Jesus is the one who has covered all of our trespasses. Isaiah 53:10 says: “. . . the LORD makes his life a guilt offering. . . ” In verse 11, God will see His sacrifice and therewith be “satisfied.” In the word “satisfied” is contained the Biblical doctrine of propitiation, the doctrine of satisfaction. There are many passages of scripture that indicate to us that God’s law demands satisfaction: Romans 3:21; Hebrews 2:17; I John 2:2; 4:10. Jesus is the satisfaction. He more than pays the guilt. In II Corinthians 5:19 we read that God was in Christ on the cross, “. . . reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them.” Jesus bore the guilt; He covered the debt and accepted the penalty in His sacrifice on the cross of Calvary.