In God is holiness. God is holy. Anything less than holiness that comes between us and God sours the relationship – more than a mere distate or uncomfotable feeling, it is separation from God. It is the sandals that God instructs Moses to remove as the latter approached the site of God’s presence, the burning bush. (Exodus 3) There are times when realities is much less straightforward. The accounts of Sodom (Genesis 18) is one about the number of righteous people. A few major interpretations appear to have some validity about this passage – that’s not the focus here.
The focus here is in our everyday life (realities), we can easily become far from God, in our words, thoughts and deeds. Realities is such that our effort for holiness (to be more like Jesus) sometimes fail:
And this can be without our knowing, or it could be where we say it was because of a certain person, or a certain event, our reaction to it is that we did and said something that is not holy.
Other times, it was our deliberate words or thoughts or deeds that are just not pleasing to God.
This appears to be what Leviticus 4 focuses on. The word “When” in Leviticus 4:22 is significant.
- Although it is in reference to a ruler or a leader, those who are not rulers or leaders should not regard that they are excluded.
- Even if there is argument for the fact that they were not in a position of decision-making or authority, they would play the role of “informers in love”, 4:23.
An important point here is once it was made known to us that we had sinned, our reaction is to seek redemption.
- There is some clarity when a third person presents a case to us that we have sinned.
- Very often, if we want to present our standpoint that we have not sinned, it is one-sided, we are defensive.
- “The spirit of the text of Leviticus is that (a) knowledge that sin has occurred, and then (b) ask for forgiveness.” (How serious is serious?).
In Leviticus 4:22-26, one of the main points is that a leader or ruler who has sinned could have a way to resolve of their sin to God. The point about restoration to God is clear, it is the motive behind the text such that we are with God again, the God of holiness.
Of course, there is a logical sequence in the text:
(a) ruler or leader,
(b) who unknowingly sinned,
(c) told about it,
(d) took steps to restore relationship with God.
We could say (b) is dependent on (a), and (c) or both (b) and (a) and so on.
The dependencis might be example of a habitual sequence but it is not a ritual formula. In other words, it could be that in the time of Levitucs (and perhaps now), rulers who (unknowingly) sin should be told about it and they should then make sacrifice (in the time of Leviticus) or seek God’s forgiveness (New Testament onwards). But we can’t turn this into a ritual formula, for example, that we (c) cannot tell (a) a leader about their sin if it was not (b) “unknowingly”.
In the time of Leviticus, a way to be reconciled to God would be such a huge relief. Again, this is not to arise the occasion that we could keep on sinning, but without that possibility of restoration with God, we would be eternally separated from God. We are eternally grateful to God for his provision.
The point about restoration to God is clear, it is the motive behind the text such that we are with God again, the God of holiness.
