Rosangela,

Given the interpretation you expressed here, how do you account for there having been no sacrifice for sins other than for sins of ignorance? Did Jesus, our Sacrifice, only die for our unintentional sins?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I'm with R on this one. (And on just about everything else, it seems. She must be one smart cookie. )

Anyway, look at Leviticus 6:1-7. That describes intentional sins and the sacrifice required. All the other sacrifices, as far as I know, are for unintentional sins. This passage is also notable because most of the time, intentional sin was handled by stoning, not an offering.

So, yes, Jesus died for intentional sins also. But the nature of intentional sin is that the sinner is often beyond restoration. The problem is not that the sacrifice is insufficient, but that the sinner does not want the sacrifice.

This week's lesson goes over the rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram. That was a nasty episode. But if we read the account in PP and we find that the different classes of sinners were treated differently.

The PP account tells us clearly that this was rebellion, not some kind of accidental, unintentional sin. But look at this very interesting verse: "Now Korah the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, with Dathan and Abiram the sons of Eliab, and On the son of Peleth, sons of Reuben, took men;" (Numbers 16:1) Notice that there are FOUR rebels listed. But after this, you don't hear about "On the son of Peleth" anymore. Sometimes, Christ can save even rebels.

Arnold, I hope we both are right, otherwise we will both be wrong.

GC, that there was no atonement specified by law for many willful sins is a fact. The meaning of this, however, cannot be that forgiveness for these sins is impossible (otherwise David couldn't have been forgiven). The meaning, as Arnold says, must be that the nature of a willful sin is such that, in many cases, the sinner cannot be forgiven because he does not want, or care, to be forgiven.

"For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries" (Heb. 10:26, 27).

Rosangela and Arnold,

Why is the Bible so clear that the sacrifices were only for sins of ignorance?

Certainly, Arnold, there were many names for the sacrifices. Among them, consider the following:

trespass offering
burnt offering
drink offering
heave offering
peace offering
meat offering
wave offering
sin offering

It is my understanding that all of the sacrifices were essentially divided among three purposes: 1) thanksgiving, 2) redemption (e.g. buying back the firstborn from God), and 3) sin.

I have not seen any distinction in the sin(s) as it relates to the sacrifice. Nor does the wealth of the sinner have any effect on the sacrifice, except in the more extreme cases of poverty where doves were permitted in place of the sheep.

Arnold, let's suppose for a moment, however, that you are correct in there having been differences among the sins or sacrifices. It stands to reason that with so many different ways of referring to the sacrifices, some terms would apply to one category of sin, while other terms represented another class. Would you agree?

Now, go back and read the five verses prior to the ones you asked me to read, keeping in mind that in the original Hebrew there were no chapter demarcations, so this was all part of the same passage. Those verses define the "trespass offering," which you seem to believe refers to intentional sin in chapter six. However, in chapter five, the definition for this is that of a "sin through ignorance."

That's where I am coming from. Every sacrifice was for a sin of ignorance. I have yet to find one defined for any other class of sin.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Indeed, most the sins I commit are thoughts, words, and deeds I know very well are unlike Jesus. I shudder to think they are unpardonable. Woe is me.

GC, I'm not sure what your point is. It seems you don't believe human beings can sin willfully. If they can't, why are willful sins not only mentioned in the Bible, but said to be punishable with death, and many examples of them provided in the OT?

Rosangela,

Willful sins have nothing to do with sins of ignorance, or at least, very little.

Let's just say you go to the store and choose to purchase some noodle soup for which the ingredients are all listed in Chinese. You willfully choose the soup, even though you know it probably has some black pepper in it, which Ellen White speaks against. You say to yourself, who cares if it has some spice--spice tastes good!

Is this a sin? Perhaps so. Do you know how much that black pepper will affect you? Maybe not. Do you know how sad your choice will make God? No. Do you comprehend the effect this may have on those around you? Likely not. Are you ignorant of these things, in spite of your choice? Yes.

Now, let's go a step further and add that there was also some shrimp and chicken fat in that soup--but you did not know this, as you could not read the label. Gets complicated, doesn't it?

Every sin we do, whether intentional or unintentional, is one of ignorance. We simply do not know God. We do not comprehend the weight of sin, nor its effects upon us, others, or eternity.

I might not know two people who are running for office in the local election. I am ignorant of their views. Yet, as a registered voter (FMA), I can still exercise my power of choice to intentionally choose one of them on my ballot. Is my action intentional? Certainly. Is it based upon knowledge or ignorance? Ignorance.

Now, put God and His law vs. Satan and sin on that ballot. Are you voting ignorantly, or do you fully know and comprehend the character of each? We see through a glass, darkly. "No man hath seen God at any time." We do not know God fully, nor do we know the full depths of sin. We are largely ignorant.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Mike, this does not fall under the category of a willful sin. A willful sin is a sin in which you despise the Word of the Lord (Num. 15:31). The verb bazah, “to despise,” means to treat something as worthless, to treat it with contempt, to look down the nose at something as it were.

GC, I'm not following you. The Bible says willful or presumptuous sins can be committed, and so does Ellen White. What do you do with these passages?
You cannot use terms as you please. Sins of ignorance are, both in the Bible and in the SOP, opposed to willful sins, which means these are the two main classes of sins.

Rosangela,

I don't know how I can be more clear. Can you make a choice without knowing the full facts? If you are ignorant, does this mean you can no longer do something intentionally? Why do you think intentional actions cannot be done in ignorance?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.