Worthy.Bible » DARBY » Leviticus » Chapter 5 » Verse 4

Leviticus 5:4 Darby English Bible (DARBY)

4 Or if any one swear, talking rashly with the lips, to do evil or to do good, in everything that a man shall say rashly with an oath, and it be hid from him, when he knoweth [it], then is he guilty in one of these.

Cross Reference

Acts 23:12 DARBY

And when it was day, the Jews, having banded together, put themselves under a curse, saying that they would neither eat nor drink till they should kill Paul.

Mark 6:23 DARBY

And he swore to her, Whatsoever thou shalt ask me I will give thee, to half of my kingdom.

1 Samuel 25:22 DARBY

So and more also do God to the enemies of David, if I leave of all that is his by the morning light any male.

Judges 11:31 DARBY

then whoever comes forth from the doors of my house to meet me, when I return victorious from the Ammonites, shall be the LORD's, and I will offer him up for a burnt offering."

2 Samuel 21:7 DARBY

But the king spared Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan the son of Saul, because of Jehovah's oath that was between them, between David and Jonathan the son of Saul.

Matthew 14:9 DARBY

And the king was grieved; but on account of the oaths, and those lying at table with [him], he commanded [it] to be given.

Matthew 14:7 DARBY

whereupon he promised with oath to give her whatsoever she should ask.

Ezekiel 17:18-19 DARBY

He despised the oath, and broke the covenant; and behold, he had given his hand, yet hath he done all these things: he shall not escape. Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah: [As] I live, verily, mine oath which he hath despised, and my covenant which he hath broken, even it will I recompense upon his head.

Ecclesiastes 5:2-6 DARBY

Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thy heart be hasty to utter anything before God: for God is in the heavens, and thou upon earth; therefore let thy words be few. For a dream cometh through the multitude of business, and a fool's voice through a multitude of words. When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed. Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay. Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an inadvertence. Wherefore should God be wroth at thy voice, and destroy the work of thy hands?

Psalms 132:2-5 DARBY

How he swore unto Jehovah, vowed unto the Mighty One of Jacob: I will not come into the tent of my house, I will not go up to the couch of my bed; I will not give sleep to mine eyes, slumber to mine eyelids, Until I find out a place for Jehovah, habitations for the Mighty One of Jacob. ...

2 Kings 6:31 DARBY

And he said, God do so, and more also to me, if the head of Elisha the son of Shaphat shall remain on him this day!

Leviticus 27:2-34 DARBY

Speak unto the children of Israel and say unto them, When any one devoteth [anything] by a vow, the persons shall be for Jehovah according to thy valuation. And thy valuation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old: thy valuation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary; and if it be of a female, thy valuation shall be thirty shekels. And if it be from five years old even unto twenty years old, thy valuation of the male shall be twenty shekels, and for the female ten shekels. And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, thy valuation of the male shall be five shekels of silver; and for the female thy valuation shall be three shekels of silver. And if it be from sixty years old and above, if it be a male, thy valuation shall be fifteen shekels; and for the female ten shekels. And if he be poorer than thy valuation, he shall present himself before the priest, and the priest shall value him: according to his means that vowed shall the priest value him. And if it be a beast whereof men bring an offering unto Jehovah, all that they give of such unto Jehovah shall be holy. They shall not alter it nor change it, a good for a bad, or a bad for a good; and if he at all change beast for beast, then it and the exchange thereof shall be holy. And if it be any unclean beast, of which they do not bring an offering unto Jehovah, then he shall present the beast before the priest; and the priest shall value it, [judging] between good and bad: according to the valuation of the priest, so shall it be. And if they will in any wise redeem it, then they shall add a fifth [part] thereof unto thy valuation. And when any one halloweth his house, that it may be holy to Jehovah, the priest shall value it, [judging] between good and bad: as the priest shall value it, so shall it stand. And if he that halloweth it will redeem his house, he shall add the fifth of the money of thy valuation unto it, and it shall be his. And if a man hallow to Jehovah [part] of a field of his possession, thy valuation shall be according to what may be sown in it: the homer of barley seed at fifty shekels of silver. If he hallow his field from the year of jubilee, according to thy valuation shall it stand; but if he hallow his field after the jubilee, then the priest shall reckon unto him the money according to the years that remain, until the year of the jubilee; and there shall be a reduction from thy valuation. And if he that hallowed the field will in any wise redeem it, he shall add the fifth of the money of thy valuation unto it, and it shall be assured to him; but if he do not redeem the field, or if he sell the field to another man, it cannot be redeemed any more; and the field, when it goeth out in the jubilee, shall be holy to Jehovah, as a field devoted; the possession thereof shall be the priest's. And if he hallow to Jehovah a field that he hath bought, which is not of the fields of his possession, the priest shall reckon unto him the amount of thy valuation, unto the year of the jubilee; and he shall give thy valuation on that day, [as] holy to Jehovah. In the year of the jubilee the field shall return unto him of whom it was bought -- to him to whom the land belonged. And all thy valuation shall be according to the shekel of the sanctuary: twenty gerahs shall be the shekel. Only the firstling which is offered as firstling to Jehovah among the cattle, that shall no man hallow, whether it be ox or sheep; it is Jehovah's. But if it be of an unclean beast, then he shall ransom it according to thy valuation, and shall add a fifth of it thereto; and if it be not redeemed, it shall be sold according to thy valuation. Notwithstanding, no devoted thing that a man hath devoted to Jehovah of all that he hath, of man or beast, or of the field of his possession, shall be sold or redeemed: every devoted thing is most holy to Jehovah. Nothing devoted, which shall be devoted from among men, shall be ransomed: it shall certainly be put to death. And as to every tithe of the land, of the seed of the land, and of the fruit of the tree, it is Jehovah's: it is holy to Jehovah. And if any one will at all redeem of his tithes, he shall add thereto the fifth thereof. And as to every tithe of the herd, or of the flock, of whatever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy to Jehovah. He shall not search whether it be good or bad, neither shall he change it; and if he change it at all, then both it and the exchange thereof shall be holy; it shall not be redeemed. These are the commandments which Jehovah commanded Moses for the children of Israel upon mount Sinai.

1 Samuel 24:21-22 DARBY

Swear now therefore to me by Jehovah, that thou wilt not cut off my seed after me, and that thou wilt not destroy my name out of my father's house. And David swore to Saul. And Saul went home; and David and his men went up to the stronghold.

1 Samuel 14:24-28 DARBY

But the men of Israel were distressed that day. Now Saul had adjured the people, saying, Cursed be the man that eateth food until evening, and [until] I am avenged on mine enemies. So none of the people tasted food. And all they of the land came to a wood; and there was honey on the ground. And the people had come into the wood, and behold, the honey flowed; but no man put his hand to his mouth, for the people feared the oath. But Jonathan had not heard when his father adjured the people; and he put forth the end of his staff which was in his hand, and dipped it in the honeycomb, and put his hand to his mouth, and his eyes became bright. Then answered one of the people and said, Thy father strictly adjured the people, saying, Cursed be the man that eateth food this day; and the people are faint.

1 Samuel 1:11 DARBY

And she vowed a vow, and said, O Jehovah of hosts, if thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of thy handmaid, and remember me, and not forget thy handmaid, but wilt give unto thy handmaid a man child, then I will give him to Jehovah all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his head.

Judges 21:18 DARBY

Yet we cannot give them wives of our daughters." For the people of Israel had sworn, "Cursed be he who gives a wife to Benjamin."

Judges 21:7 DARBY

What shall we do for wives for those who are left, since we have sworn by the LORD that we will not give them any of our daughters for wives?"

Judges 9:19 DARBY

if you then have acted in good faith and honor with Jerubba'al and with his house this day, then rejoice in Abim'elech, and let him also rejoice in you;

Joshua 9:15 DARBY

And Joshua made peace with them, and made a covenant with them, to let them live; and the princes of the assembly swore unto them.

Joshua 2:14 DARBY

And the men said to her, Our lives shall pay for yours, if ye do not make this our business known; and it shall be when Jehovah shall give us the land, that we will deal kindly and truly with thee.

Numbers 30:8 DARBY

But if her husband prohibit her on the day that he heareth it, and annul her vow which is upon her, and what hath passed her lips, wherewith she hath bound her soul, then Jehovah shall pardon her.

Numbers 30:6 DARBY

And if she have a husband, when she hath her vow upon her or ought that hath passed her lips wherewith she hath bound her soul,

Worthy.Bible » Commentaries » Keil & Delitzsch Commentary » Commentary on Leviticus 5

Commentary on Leviticus 5 Keil & Delitzsch Commentary


Verses 1-13

There follow here three special examples of sin on the part of the common Israelite, all sins of omission and rashness of a lighter kind than the cases mentioned in Leviticus 4:27.; in which, therefore, if the person for whom expiation was to be made was in needy circumstances, instead of a goat or ewe-sheep, a pair of doves could be received as a sacrificial gift, or, in cases of still greater poverty, the tenth of an ephah of fine flour. The following were the cases. The first (Leviticus 5:1), when any one had heard the voice of an oath (an oath spoken aloud) and was a witness, i.e., was in a condition to give evidence, whether he had seen what took place or had learned it, that is to say, had come to the knowledge of it in some other way. In this case, if he did not make it known, he was to bear his offence, i.e., to bear the guilt, which he had contracted by omitting to make it known, with all its consequences. אלה does not mean a curse in general, but an oath, as an imprecation upon one's self (= the “oath of cursing” in Numbers 5:21); and the sin referred to did not consist in the fact that a person heard a curse, imprecation, or blasphemy, and gave no evidence of it (for neither the expression “and is a witness,” nor the words “hath seen or known of it,” are in harmony with this), but in the fact that one who knew of another's crime, whether he had seen it, or had come to the certain knowledge of it in any other way, and was therefore qualified to appear in court as a witness for the conviction of the criminal, neglected to do so, and did not state what he had seen or learned, when he heard the solemn adjuration of the judge at the public investigation of the crime, by which all persons present, who knew anything of the matter, were urged to come forward as witnesses (vid., Oehler in Herzog's Cycl.). עון נשׁא , to bear the offence or sin, i.e., to take away and endure its consequences (see Genesis 4:13), whether they consisted in chastisements and judgments, by which God punished the sin (Leviticus 7:18; Leviticus 17:16; Leviticus 19:17), such as diseases or distress (Numbers 5:31; Numbers 14:33-34), childlessness (Leviticus 20:20), death (Leviticus 22:9), or extermination (Leviticus 19:8; Leviticus 20:17; Leviticus 9:13), or in punishment inflicted by men (Leviticus 24:15), or whether they could be expiated by sin-offerings (as in this passage and Leviticus 5:17) and other kinds of atonement. In this sense חמא נשׂא is also sometimes used (see at Leviticus 19:17).

Leviticus 5:2-3

The second was, if any one had touched the carcase of an unclean beast, or cattle, or creeping thing, or the uncleanness of a man of any kind whatever (“with regard to all his uncleanness, with which he defiles himself,” i.e., any kind of defilement to which a man is exposed), and “ it is hidden from him, ” sc., the uncleanness or defilement; that is to say, if he had unconsciously defiled himself by touching unclean objects, and had consequently neglected the purification prescribed for such cases. In this case, if he found it out afterwards, he had contracted guilt which needed expiation.

Leviticus 5:4

The third was, if any one should “ swear to prate with the lips, ” i.e., swear in idle, empty words of the lips, - “ to do good or evil, ” i.e., that he would do anything whatever (Numbers 24:13; Isaiah 41:23), - “ with regard to all that he speaks idly with an oath, ” i.e., if it related to something which a man had affirmed with an oath in thoughtless conversation, - “ and it is hidden from him, ” i.e., if he did not reflect that he might commit sin by such thoughtless swearing, and if he perceived it afterwards and discovered his sin, and had incurred guilt with regard to one of the things which he had thoughtlessly sworn.

Leviticus 5:5-6

If any one therefore (the three cases enumerated are comprehended under the one expression כי והיה , for the purpose of introducing the apodosis) had contracted guilt with reference to one of these (the things named in Leviticus 5:1-4), and confessed in what he had sinned, he was to offer as his guilt (trespass) to the Lord, for the sin which he had sinned, a female from the flock-for a sin-offering, that the priest might make atonement for him on account of his sin. אשׁם (Leviticus 5:6) does not mean either guilt-offering or debitum ( Knobel ), but culpa, delictum, reatus , as in Leviticus 5:7 : “as his guilt,” i.e., for the expiation of his guilt, which he had brought upon himself.

Leviticus 5:7-10

But if his hand does not reach what is sufficient for a sheep, ” i.e., if he could not afford enough to sacrifice a sheep (“his hand” is put for what his hand acquires), he was to bring two turtle-doves or two young pigeons, one for the sin-offering, the other for the burnt-offering. The pigeon intended for the sin, i.e., for the sin-offering, he was to bring first of all to the priest, who was to offer it in the following manner. The head was to be pinched off from opposite to its neck, i.e., in the nape just below the head, though without entirely severing it, that is to say, it was to be pinched off sufficiently to kill the bird and allow the blood to flow out. He was then to sprinkle of the blood upon the wall of the altar, which could be effected by swinging the bleeding pigeon, and to squeeze out the rest of the blood against the wall of the altar, because it was a sin-offering; for in the burnt-offering he let all the blood flow out against the wall of the altar (Leviticus 1:15). What more was done with the pigeon is not stated. Hence it cannot be decided with certainty, whether, after the crop and its contents were removed and thrown upon the ash-heap, the whole of the bird was burned upon the altar, or whether it fell to the priest, as the Mishnah affirms (Seb. vi. 4), so that none of it was placed upon the altar. One circumstance which seems to favour the statement in the Talmud is the fact, that in the sin-offering of pigeons, a second pigeon was to be offered as a burnt-offering, and, according to Leviticus 5:10, for the purpose of making an atonement; probably for no other purpose than to burn it upon the altar, as the dove of the sin-offering was not burned, and the sacrifice was incomplete without some offering upon the altar. In the case of sin-offerings of quadrupeds, the fat portions were laid upon the altar, and the flesh could be eaten by the priest by virtue of his office; but in that of pigeons, it was not possible to separate fat portions from the flesh for the purpose of burning upon the altar by themselves, and it would not do to divide the bird in half, and let one half be burned and the other eaten by the priest, as this would have associated the idea of halfness or incompleteness with the sacrifice. A second pigeon was therefore to be sacrificed as a burnt-offering, כּמּשׂפּט , according to the right laid down in Leviticus 1:14., that the priest might make atonement for the offerer on account of his sin, whereas in the sin-offering of a quadruped one sacrificial animal was sufficient to complete the expiation.

(Note: From the instructions to offer two pigeons in order to obtain expiation, it is perfectly evident that the eating of the flesh of the sin-offering on the part of the priest formed an essential part of the act of expiation, and was not merely a kind of honourable tribute, which God awarded to His servants who officiated at the sacrifice.)

Leviticus 5:11-13

But if any one could not afford even two pigeons, he was to offer the tenth of an ephah of fine flour as a sin-offering. ידו תּשּׂיג for ידו תּגּיע (Leviticus 5:7): his hand reaches to anything, is able to raise it, or with an accusative, obtains, gets anything (used in the same sense in Leviticus 14:30, Leviticus 14:31), or else absolutely, acquires, or gets rich (Leviticus 25:26, Leviticus 25:47). But it was to be offered without oil and incense, because it was a sin-offering, that is to say, “because it was not to have the character of a minchah ” ( Oehler ). But the reason why it was not to have this character was, that only those who were in a state of grace could offer a minchah , and not a man who had fallen from grace through sin. As such a man could not offer to the Lord the fruits of the Spirit of God and of prayer, he was not allowed to add oil and incense, as symbols of the Spirit and praise of God, to the sacrifice with which he sought the forgiveness of sin. The priest was to take a handful of the meal offered, and burn it upon the altar as a memorial, and thus make atonement for the sinner on account of his sin. - On “ his handful ” and “ a memorial ” ( Azcarah ), see Leviticus 2:2. “ In one of these ” (Leviticus 5:13 as in Leviticus 5:5): cf. Leviticus 4:2. “ And let it (the remainder of the meal offered) belong to the priest like the meat-offering: ” i.e., as being most holy (Leviticus 2:3).


Verses 14-19

(Ch. 5:14-6:7)

(Note: In the original the division of verses in the Hebrew text is followed; but we have thought it better to keep to the arrangement adopted in our English version. - Tr.)

The Trespass-Offerings. - These were presented for special sins, by which a person had contracted guilt, and therefore they are not included in the general festal sacrifices. Three kinds of offences are mentioned in this section as requiring trespass-offerings. The first is, “ if a soul commit a breach of trust, and sin in going wrong in the holy gifts of Jehovah. ” מעל , lit., to cover, hence מעיל the cloak, over-coat, signifies to act secretly, unfaithfully, especially against Jehovah, either by falling away from Him into idolatry, by which the fitting honour was withheld from Jehovah (Leviticus 26:40; Deuteronomy 32:51; Joshua 22:16), or by infringing upon His rights, abstracting something that rightfully belonged to Him. Thus in Joshua 7:1; Joshua 22:20, it is applied to fraud in relation to that which had been put under the ban; and in Numbers 5:12, Numbers 5:27,it is also applied to a married woman's unfaithfulness to her husband: so that sin was called מעל , when regarded as a violation of existing rights. “ The holy things of Jehovah ” were the holy gifts, sacrifices, first-fruits, tithes, etc., which were to be offered to Jehovah, and were assigned by Him to the priests for their revenue (see Leviticus 21:22). חטא with מן is constructio praegnans: to sin in anything by taking away from Jehovah that which belonged to Him. בּשׁגגה , in error (see Leviticus 4:2): i.e., in a forgetful or negligent way. Whoever sinned in this way was to offer to the Lord as his guilt (see Leviticus 5:6) a ram from the flock without blemish for a trespass-offering (lit., guilt-offering ), according to the estimate of Moses, whose place was afterwards taken by the officiating priest (Leviticus 27:12; Numbers 18:16). שׁקלים כּסף “ money of shekels, ” i.e., several shekels in amount, which Abenezra and others have explained, no doubt correctly, as meaning that the ram was to be worth more than one shekel, two shekels at least. The expression is probably kept indefinite, for the purpose of leaving some margin for the valuation, so that there might be a certain proportion between the value of the ram and the magnitude of the trespass committed (see Oehler ut sup. p. 645). “ In the holy shekel: ” see Exodus 30:13. At the same time, the culprit was to make compensation for the fraud committed in the holy thing, and add a fifth (of the value) over, as in the case of the redemption of the first-born, of the vegetable tithe, or of what had been vowed to God (Leviticus 27:27, Leviticus 27:31, and Leviticus 27:13, Leviticus 27:15, Leviticus 27:19). The ceremony to be observed in the offering of the ram is described in Leviticus 7:1. It was the same as that of the sin-offerings, whose blood was not brought into the holy place, except with regard to the sprinkling of the blood, and in this the trespass-offering resembled the burnt-offerings and peace-offerings.

The second case (Leviticus 5:17-19), from its very position between the other two, which both refer to the violation of rights, must belong to the same category; although the sin is introduced with the formula used in Leviticus 4:27 in connection with those sins which were to be expiated by a sin-offering. But the violation of right can only have consisted in an invasion of Jehovah's rights with regard to Israel, and not, as Knobel supposes, in an invasion of the rights of private Israelites, as distinguished from the priests; an antithesis of which there is not the slightest indication. This is evident from the fact, that the case before us is linked on to the previous one without anything intervening; whereas the next case, which treats of the violation of the rights of a neighbour, is separated by a special introductory formula. The expression, “ and wist it not, ” refers to ignorance of the sin, and not of the divine commands; as may be clearly seen from Leviticus 5:18 : “the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his error, which he committed without knowing it.” The trespass-offering was the same as in the former case, and was also to be valued by the priest; but no compensation is mentioned, probably because the violation of right, which consisted in the transgression of one of the commands of God, was of such a kind as not to allow of material compensation. The third case (Leviticus 6:1-7) is distinguished from the other two by a new introductory formula. The sin and unfaithfulness to Jehovah are manifested in this case in a violation of the rights of a neighbour. “ If a man deny to his neighbour ( כּחשׁ with a double ב obj ., to deny a thing to a person) a pikkadon (i.e., a deposit, a thing entrusted to him to keep, Genesis 41:36), or יד תּשׂוּמת , “ a thing placed in his hand ” (handed over to him as a pledge) “or גּזל , a thing robbed ” (i.e., the property of a neighbour unjustly appropriated, whether a well, a field, or cattle, Genesis 21:25; Micah 2:2; Job 24:2), “ or if he have oppressed his neighbour ” (i.e., forced something from him or withheld it unjustly, Leviticus 19:13; Deuteronomy 24:14; Joshua 12:8; Malachi 3:5), “ or have found a lost thing and denies it, and thereby swears to his lie ” (i.e., rests his oath upon a lie), “ on account of one of all that a man is accustomed to do to sin therewith: ” the false swearing here refers not merely to a denial of what is found, but to all the crimes mentioned, which originated in avarice and selfishness, but through the false swearing became frauds against Jehovah, adding guilt towards God to the injustice done to the neighbour, and requiring, therefore, not only that a material restitution should be made to the neighbour, but that compensation should be made to God as well. Whatever had been robbed, or taken by force, or entrusted or found, and anything about which a man had sworn falsely (Leviticus 6:4, Leviticus 6:5), was to be restored “ according to its sum ” (cf. Exodus 30:12; Numbers 1:2, etc.), i.e., in its full value; beside which, he was to “ add its fifths ” (on the plural, see Ges. §87, 2; Ew . §186 e), i.e., in every one of the things abstracted or withheld unjustly the fifth part of the value was to be added to the full amount (as in Leviticus 5:16). “ To him to whom it (belongs), shall he give it ” אשׁמתו בּיום : in the day when he makes atonement for his trespass, i.e., offers his trespass-offering. The trespass (guilt) against Jehovah was to be taken away by the trespass-offering according to the valuation of the priest, as in Leviticus 5:15, Leviticus 5:16, and Leviticus 5:18, that he might receive expiation and forgiveness on account of what he had done.

If now, in order to obtain a clear view of the much canvassed difference between the sin-offerings and trespass-offerings,

(Note: For the different views, see Bähr's Symbolik ; Winer's bibl. R. W.; Kurtz on Sacrificial Worship; Riehm, theol. Stud. und Krit. 1854, pp. 93ff.; Rinck, id. 1855, p. 369; Oehler in Herzog's Cycl.)

we look at once at the other cases, for which trespass-offerings were commanded in the law; we find in Numbers 5:5-8 not only a trespass against Jehovah, but an unjust withdrawal of the property of a neighbour, clearly mentioned as a crime, for which material compensation was to be made with the addition of a fifth of its value, just as in Leviticus 5:2-7 of the present chapter. So also the guilt of a man who had lain with the slave of another (Leviticus 19:20-22) did not come into the ordinary category of adultery, but into that of an unjust invasion of the domain of another's property; though in this case, as the crime could not be estimated in money, instead of material compensation being made, a civil punishment (viz., bodily scourging) was to be inflicted; and for the same reason nothing is said about the valuation of the sacrificial ram. Lastly, in the trespass-offerings for the cleansing of a leper (Leviticus 14:12.), or of a Nazarite who had been defiled by a corpse (Numbers 6:12), it is true we cannot show in what definite way the rights of Jehovah were violated (see the explanation of these passages), but the sacrifices themselves served to procure the restoration of the persons in question to certain covenant rights which they had lost; so that even here the trespass-offering, for which moreover only a male sheep was demanded, was to be regarded as a compensation or equivalent for the rights to be restored. From all these cases it is perfectly evident, that the idea of satisfaction for a right, which had been violated but was about to be restored or recovered, lay at the foundation of the trespass-offering,

(Note: Even in the case of the trespass-offering, which those who had taken heathen wives offered at Ezra's instigation (Ezra 10:18.), it had reference to a trespass (cf. vv. 2 and 10), an act of unfaithfulness to Jehovah, which demanded satisfaction. And so again the Philistines (1 Samuel 6:3.), when presenting gifts as a trespass-offering for Jehovah, rendered satisfaction for the robbery committed upon Him by the removal of the ark of the covenant.)

and the ritual also points to this. The animal sacrificed was always a ram, except in the cases mentioned in Leviticus 14:12. and Numbers 6:12. This fact alone clearly distinguishes the trespass-offerings from the sin-offerings, for which all kinds of sacrifices were offered from an ox to a pigeon, the choice of the animal being regulated by the position of the sinner and the magnitude of his sin. But they are distinguished still more by the fact, that in the case of all the sin-offerings the blood was to be put upon the horns of the altar, or even taken into the sanctuary itself, whereas the blood of the trespass-offerings, like that of the burnt and peace-offerings, was merely swung against the wall of the altar (Leviticus 7:2). Lastly, they were also distinguished by the fact, that in the trespass-offering the ram was in most instances to be valued by the priest, not for the purpose of determining its actual value, which could not vary very materially in rams of the same kind, but to fix upon it symbolically the value of the trespass for which compensation was required. Hence there can be no doubt, that as the idea of the expiation of sin, which was embodied in the sprinkling of the blood, was most prominent in the sin-offering; so the idea of satisfaction for the restoration of rights that had been violated or disturbed came into the foreground in the trespass-offering. This satisfaction was to be actually made, wherever the guilt admitted of a material valuation, by means of payment or penance; and in addition to this, the animal was raised by the priestly valuation into the authorized bearer of the satisfaction to be rendered to the rights of God, through the sacrifice of which the culprit could obtain the expiation of his guilt.