And if any one sin and do against any of all the commandments of Jehovah what should not be done, and hath not known [it], yet is he guilty, and shall bear his iniquity.
Here a person breaks one of God's commands without ever realising it. He is still counted guilty. So whose knowledge sets the standard, ours or God's? And what help is there for wrongs we never saw ourselves commit?
The person here is not defiant. He simply did not know. That changed nothing. The commands were written down, and God's people were responsible to keep them. Where the ESV has "then realizes his guilt," older translations read "yet is he guilty" — the sense the writers below follow.
Ignorance was no tenable excuse. They were Israelites, and the LORD had imposed commandments which they were responsible to keep. If anyone did not know, yet he was guilty. Indifference to His requirements must have been the state behind it... Was the LORD to be blind, because the man failed to know what was plainly written in His law? He was guilty, and must bear his iniquity.
Many people assume that if nothing troubles them inside, nothing is wrong. This verse cuts that assumption away. The measure lies outside us.
We cannot press this on our minds too strongly: conscience is not the standard of right and wrong. The word of God alone is that standard. The Word itself testifies about the man who breaks one of the LORD's commandments without knowing it. He is still guilty, and he shall bear his iniquity. For who can honestly say he was necessarily ignorant of what the word of God declares?
This is not bad news but relief. If God's claims rose no higher than what we notice, they would rise and fall with our own dullness.
A man's awareness can never be the regulator in the sanctuary of God. This is an unspeakable mercy. God's holiness alone must fix the standard, when God's rights are in question.
If guilt attaches to what we did not know, ignorance is not neutral ground. One writer traces it back to its root.
Unconverted people pass over sin lightly. They say God will pardon our faults. But nothing will escape Him — not wrongs done to others, and not sins committed in ignorance, unknown to us. It is impossible to be in ignorance without sin. If I sin in ignorance, it is because I am a sinner, and ignorance is one of the consequences. If I do not love as Christ loves, that is sin.
The verse ends with the phrase "bear his iniquity." Other places in Scripture show what it means.
Do you want to see how bearing sin in Isaiah 53:12 connects with the punishment due to it? Then compare Leviticus 5:1, 17; 17:16; 24:15; Numbers 5:31; 14:34... In all of these you will see it means coming under all the consequences of the sin committed, and being answerable for it before God.
An unknown sin shows how helpless a person is to settle his own account.
There is such a thing as a sin of ignorance. Nothing shows more strongly how unable man is to deal with sin. If he does not know of it, what can he do about it? Nothing. He is as powerless as he is ignorant.
God does not leave the guilty man with the verdict only. An offering is commanded, and with it a promise repeated until it cannot be missed.
A person might sin without realising it in the holy things of the Lord, or he might sin in ignorance in such matters. The sins in verse 17 seem to refer to those mentioned in verses 15 and 16. Still, he had sinned, so he was commanded to bring a trespass offering. When that offering was properly dealt with at the altar, the guilty one could go home with the assurance from the LORD Himself that his sin was forgiven. The Lord was so careful to impress this on the offender that it is stated three times in these few verses. Pardon from the priest was not the question. No priest in Aaron's family could pardon a man's sins, but he could tell him what the LORD had promised.
This law is why a believer can rest about failures he has never even noticed.
We could not enjoy true peace and freedom of heart if we did not know one thing. Our divine Trespass Offering has perfectly met the claims connected with the holy things of the Lord... Our very best service, our holiest times, our most sacred moments of devotion may still hold something of trespass in the holy things of the Lord — something that ought not to be done. So we need the assurance that the precious blood of Christ has met every one of our trespasses.
- Standard — God's written word measures guilt, not what our conscience happens to notice. His holiness alone fixes the scale.
- Guilty — "Though he did not know it" removes the excuse, not the guilt. Ignorance is itself one of the consequences of being a sinner.
- Bearing — To bear iniquity means to come under all the consequences of the sin and to be answerable for it before God.
- Helpless — A sin we cannot see is a sin we cannot deal with; unknown guilt proves we can never settle our own case.
- Forgiven — The guilty man brought the offering, and God's own promise gave him forgiveness. What he could not know or repair, the true Trespass Offering has fully met.
And he shall bring a ram without blemish out of the small cattle, according to thy valuation, as trespass-offering, unto the priest; and the priest shall make atonement for him concerning his inadvertence wherein he sinned inadvertently, and knew [it] not, and it shall be forgiven him.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
It is a trespass-offering he hath certainly trespassed against Jehovah.
Leviticus 5:19 ends the law of the guilt offering with a verdict: the man who sinned without knowing it was still guilty before the LORD. How can a man be guilty of a wrong he never noticed, and why say it so strongly right after promising forgiveness?
One commentator quotes an older translation that repeats the verb, and shows why ignorance is no excuse.
Neither carelessness nor ignorance could hide his guilt or remove the offering needed for it. But the man who offered in this way would be forgiven. The language here is even stronger: "It is a trespass offering: trespassing he trespassed before Jehovah." Otherwise a man might easily have excused it.
This offering treats wrongdoing as damage done, and damage has a price.
The trespass offering also deals with sin, but not simply as evil in general. It deals with sin as an injury to God or to people. These too are sins of ignorance. This section speaks first of sin in holy things. For it a man had to offer a ram without blemish, and silver as well, valued according to the injury done. He had to pay the trespass in full, and add a fifth part on top. Only this counted as making proper amends.
If the man did not know, then something other than his awareness decided the case.
Suppose we have gone wrong as worshippers, doing without knowing it any of the things that are forbidden. Here is sin, though we did not know it. The holiness of God is not limited by our conscience.
Another writer presses further back, asking where the ignorance itself came from.
Unconverted people pass lightly over sin and say that God will pardon our faults; but nothing will escape Him, neither wrongs toward others nor sins committed in ignorance, unknown to us. It is impossible to be in ignorance without sin. If I sin in ignorance, it is because I am a sinner, and ignorance is one of its consequences.
The chapter does not leave the guilty man in suspense. The pardon rests on the sacrifice, and God Himself promises it.
The guilty one could go home with the assurance from Jehovah Himself that his sin was forgiven. The Lord was so careful to press this on the offender that the promise appears three times in these few verses. Whether the man brought a sin offering or a trespass offering, the Lord assured him of forgiveness once he brought the appointed sacrifice and met the demands of the law. Absolution from the priest was not the question. No priest of Aaron's house could absolve a man from his sins, but he could tell him what Jehovah had promised.
The repayment went beyond the loss. One writer asks what God means to gain by that.
Even this was not enough. The fifth part more still had to be added. God would have a surplus of good come out of evil, not a mere making up to where things were before. That would not be worthy of Him. How could He have allowed sin at all, merely to show His power in defeating it and no more? Such a victory would be little better than defeat.
Another writer applies the added fifth to Christ.
If man has robbed God of His glory, Christ has restored it. But if that were all He had done, man would only be put back in the position he lost by his sin. In the added fifth part there is a revenue of glory for God. That glory gives a basis for His eternal purpose and puts man into a new place in heavenly blessing.
The same truth shapes how a person walks with God day by day.
One should always realise the possibility of having sinned without knowing it. What care and sensitivity this would produce in the path of someone who wants to walk with God. We may not know that we have trespassed. But the One who measures everything by the unbending standard of the shekel of the sanctuary knows.
- Guilt. God's holiness defines the wrong, not the offender's awareness. "Trespassing he trespassed" is the verdict on a man who never knew.
- Injury. A trespass is damage done to God's rights, so the offering carries a price: full repayment measured by the sanctuary standard.
- Forgiveness. God promises pardon three times in these verses. It rests on the appointed sacrifice and on God's own word, never on a priest's absolution.
- Surplus. The extra fifth shows God will not settle for restoring the old position. He means to gain more from the evil than was lost.
- Fulfilment. One writer sees Christ restoring the glory man robbed from God, and adding a revenue of glory that gives man a new place in heavenly blessing.