And if a man lie with a woman for copulation, and she is a bondwoman betrothed to a husband, but not at all ransomed, nor hath freedom been given to her, there shall be a chastisement they shall not be put to death, for she was not free.
Leviticus 19 shows what holiness looks like in daily life. This verse takes up a hard case: a man sleeps with a slave woman who is already promised to another man. Neither of them is put to death. So why is the penalty different here, and what does the offering that follows teach?
The rules in this chapter cover ordinary relationships, and they all rest on who God is.
They were to be holy, because the Lord was holy. Chapter 19 takes up the side of good, while still keeping themselves from everything profane, and from profaning what was holy. We find what is good and kind and fitting. We find what their conduct ought to be in many details — in their relationships with one another, and in the dangers they met in their walk and their everyday circumstances. For they had to do with God, and the Lord was their God.
Her standing under the law changes the penalty. The ESV says a distinction shall be made. Older translations read the phrase as a chastisement, and Kelly takes it that way.
This next case (verses 20-22) assumes the imperfect state which the law takes into account. If she had been free, death was the penalty. But she was a slave woman and promised in marriage, so she was beaten, and he brought a guilt or trespass-offering. By that ram the priest made atonement, and God forgave the sin. Jew or Greek, slave or free, is all gone now: Christ remains for faith.
The contrast with the usual law is deliberate. Writers note that the ordinary punishment for this class of sin was capital, and that here God opened another door.
While adultery was punishable by death, a difference was made in the case of verse 20, and this sin could be atoned for by a trespass offering (vv. 21-22).
The law allowed situations that God never approved of. It set a floor, not a ceiling.
We may note that under the law things were permitted that Christians today would not tolerate. The Lord's own words in Matthew 19:7-8 show this. We must always keep in mind that "the law made nothing perfect" (Hebrews 7:19). It set out the minimum of God's demands. So anyone who fell short of it, in any way or at any time, came under the sentence of death. The maximum of all God's thoughts and desires is realised and set out in Christ.
A lighter sentence does not mean a lighter view of the act. Verses 21-22 call for a guilt offering, because God counts the wrong as done against Himself.
In every case, anyone who had failed in his responsibility this way had to bring a ram without blemish. Compare also Leviticus 19:20-22. That offence is morally wrong too, yet the Lord views it as guilt against Himself, and the guilty man had to bring the ram of atonement, as in Numbers 5:5-10.
The guilt offering carries a distinct idea. The offender had to repair the damage, not just receive pardon.
Here sin is looked at as a trespass against the government of God. The offender had to make amends for the wrong done, and add a fifth part to it. The blood of the offering made atonement, and God forgave the trespasser. This offering presents Christ, who died for our sins and trespasses on the cross, restoring what He did not take away (Psalm 69:4). He has not only answered to God for our sins and paid our debt by His shed blood. He has added the fifth part, as it were. He brings more glory to God and more blessing to man than there was before sin was committed.
- Guilt named. The woman is a slave, but the act is still sin. Her low position does not make it small. God counts it as guilt against Himself.
- Guilt measured. Because she is not free, the man does not die for this. A free woman's case would end in death. He still has to settle it with God.
- Guilt carried. He brings a ram without blemish. The priest makes atonement with it, and God forgives the sin.
- Guilt outgrown. The law works with an imperfect situation and sets only the minimum. God's full mind is not in what the law allowed, but in Christ.
- Guilt more than repaid. The trespass offering points to Christ. He paid the debt by His blood and restored what He never took. He brought God more glory than there was before sin entered.
And he shall bring his trespass-offering to Jehovah, unto the entrance of the tent of meeting, a ram for a trespass-offering.
This law closes a case that begins two verses earlier. A man wrongs a woman who is a slave, and she is promised in marriage to another. He is not put to death, but he is not let off either. He must bring a ram to God's own door. Why did a private wrong have to be settled there?
Leviticus 19 gathers rules for daily life among neighbours. One writer notes who those rules keep in view.
Leviticus 19 contains various statutes. Many of them were meant to regulate a man's dealings with his neighbour. At the same time they show God's gracious thought for those who cannot easily protect themselves. In all this the LORD asserted the glory of His name and showed His own rights. We see this in verses such as 4, 12, 21, 26, 30, 37.
Our verse is one of them.
The woman's legal status changes the outcome. One writer explains what would have happened if she had been free.
The case provided for next (verses 20-22) assumes the imperfect state of things that the law takes into account. If she had been free, death was the penalty. But she was a slave woman and promised in marriage, so she was whipped, and he brought a guilt or trespass offering. By this ram the priest made atonement, and the sin was forgiven. Jew or Greek, slave or free, is all gone now: Christ remains for faith.
One writer sets the trespass offering beside the sin offering and weighs the two Hebrew words.
We can see another shade of evil met by the trespass offering compared with the more general and public one for sin. The word for the latter is chata, which means departure from what is right. But asham, translated trespass, expresses guilt. It was an act of treachery (maal) in the holy things of the LORD, though it was supposed to be done not on purpose but by accident. It was not a moral wrong in the eyes of others. Even so, it was a secret betrayal against Him with whom they stood in holy relationship, and it brought guilt.
That is the offering our verse asks for.
One writer weighs the two things the law asked for: repayment, and a sacrifice.
The law demanded repayment. That showed that the rights of the one sinned against were not to be ignored. But the law also required a sacrifice. That showed that a trespass against one's neighbour was not something to hush up, or settle quietly, with no admission of the guilt before God... Paying back the injured party was not enough. The appointed victim also had to die, to make atonement for the guilty person, so that he might be forgiven. His neighbour's forgiveness was one thing. God's forgiveness was another, and the offender was not to be content with anything less.
The law names one animal. One writer draws out what a ram stood for.
The ram is not simply the sheep, the meek surrenderer of life. As the male sheep, it brings into that surrender a firmer and stronger will. It has an energy of character that makes it purposeful, determined surrender. So the ram was "the ram of consecration," and the animal that pictured the trespass, or restitution, offering.
Older translations call this place "the door of the tabernacle of the congregation." One writer explains which spot that was.
The door of the tabernacle of the congregation, that is, the entrance of the court to get to the tabernacle. Elsewhere the altar is said to be at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. That was the only place where the people came.
So the man could not settle his guilt at home. He had to carry the ram to the one place where God met His people.
- Guilt. Asham means guilt, not just going wrong. It names a secret betrayal of the holy relationship Israel stood in with God, even when others saw nothing.
- Gift. For that guilt the LORD named the remedy: a ram, the animal that pictured firm, determined surrender.
- Reach. The wrong touched a woman who could not protect herself, and God's law reached to her. One writer reads the lighter penalty as the law allowing for an imperfect state of things.
- Place. The ram went to the entrance of the tent of meeting. That was the only place where the people came to God, so guilt was never settled at home.
- Result. Two forgivenesses were in view: the neighbour's and God's. The offender was to be satisfied with nothing less than God's.
And the priest shall make atonement for him with the ram of the trespass-offering before Jehovah for his sin which he hath done; and the sin which he hath done shall be forgiven him.
Leviticus 19:22 closes a case that began two verses earlier. A wrong between two people is not settled between them alone. It ends at the door of the tent of meeting, with a ram and a priest. Two questions follow: why this offering, and what forgiveness the guilty man went home with.
The offence involved a slave woman who was promised in marriage to another man. Her position changed how the law dealt with the case.
The case dealt with next (verses 20-22) assumes the imperfect state of things that the law allows for. If she had been free, the penalty was death. But she was a slave woman promised in marriage, so she was beaten, and he brought a guilt or trespass offering. By that ram the priest made atonement, and the sin was forgiven. Jew or Greek, slave or free — that is all gone now: Christ remains for faith.
The offering goes "before the LORD" because that is where the account stands. Commentators group this verse with other trespass cases.
Anyone who failed in his responsibility had to bring a ram without blemish, in every case. In Leviticus 19:20-22 the offence is a moral wrong too, yet Jehovah counts it as guilt against Himself, and the ram of atonement was required there, as in Numbers 5:5-10.
The injured party's own pardon was not enough.
His neighbour's forgiveness was one thing; God's forgiveness was another, and the offender was to be content with nothing less than that. In this way the Lord would teach His people to see their acts of sin in connection with their responsibility to Him, and not only as those acts touched the person they had wronged on earth.
The choice of animal follows the kind of evil in view.
So the ram was the fitting animal to offer where holy things had been violated, and that was just the aspect of evil the trespass-offering met. It was not simple wrong — the sin-offering provided for that — but treachery in relation to Jehovah.
The verb translated "make atonement" has covering as its first sense. One writer traces what that covering did, and what it could not do.
When the guilt itself is the main thought, the Hebrew word 'al is used. It points out who or what the sin rested on — the sin that needed covering. Leviticus 19:22 is one of the places where it rests on the person himself. Keeping the first meaning of the verb in view, we can understand how it is used in these different passages... The sins of God's people in old days were covered by the blood, so God passed over them. But they were not really put away until the blood of the Lord Jesus had been shed. That alone could do it.
The last clause is the offerer's ground of peace. The priest does not grant the pardon; he announces it.
The offering was to be a ram from the flock. Once the priest had dealt with it properly at the altar, and the money payment had been made as well, the guilty one could go home with the assurance from Jehovah Himself that his sin was forgiven... Pardon from the priest was not the question. No priest of Aaron's house could pardon a man's sins. But he could tell him what Jehovah had promised, and assure him of it on the authority of what God had put in writing through Moses.
The ram did real work, yet it pointed past itself.
The offering was meant to direct people's hearts to something higher, though they could not grasp its symbolic meaning until Christ Himself was offered for our sins... For the time being the offering also gave a governmental forgiveness, but not the eternal forgiveness that is found only in the one sacrifice of Christ.
- Guilt. A wrong done to another person counts as guilt against God. So the case moves from the household to the door of the tent of meeting.
- Ram. The law calls for a ram where holy things have been violated. The trespass-offering deals with treachery toward God, not simple wrongdoing.
- Covered. "Make atonement" means to cover. The blood covered the sin, so God passed over it, though it was not yet put away.
- Forgiven. The offerer went home sure of pardon. It rested on God's own promise, which the priest announced. The priest had no power to forgive.
- Christ. What the ram gave was real, but only for a time. The one sacrifice of Christ turns covering into eternal forgiveness. And in Him the difference between slave and free, which shaped this whole case, is gone.