Does Leviticus 5:11 – 13 Teach Forgiveness Without Shedding of Blood?

Abstract

Leviticus chapter 5 is concerned with the trespass-offering. The difference between the
trespass offering and the sin-offering most likely lay not so much in the sacrifices themselves,
and the management of them, as in the occasions of the offering of them. They were both
intended to make atonement for sin; but the former was more general, this applied to some
particular instances. Thus, concerning the trespass, if a man commits a sin: (i) In concealing
his knowledge, when he is adjured (v. 1). (ii) In touching an unclean thing (v. 2, 3). (iii) In
swearing (v. 4). (iv) In embezzling the holy things (v. 14-16). (v) In any sin of infirmity (v.
17-19). Some other cases there are, in which these offerings were to be offered (chaps 6:2-4;
14:12; 19:21; Num. 6:12). And concerning the trespass-offerings, (i) Of the flock (v. 5, 6).
(ii) Of fowls (v. 7-10). (iii) Of flour (v. 11-13; but chiefly a ram without blemish (v. 15, etc.).
This paper focuses on trespass offering of flour (v. 11-13). Provision is here made for the
poor of the people of God, and the pacifying of their consciences under the sense of guilt.
Those that were not able to bring a lamb might bring for a sin-offering a pair of turtle-doves
or two young pigeons; however, if any were so extremely poor that they were not able to
procure these so often as they would have occasion, they might bring a an ephah of fine flour
for a sin offering, and this should be accepted. Therefore, it seems that the expense of the sinoffering was brought lower than that of any other offering, to teach the reader that no man's
poverty shall ever be a bar in the way of his/her forgiveness. The poorest of all may have
atonement made for them, if it be not their own fault. Furthermore, this paper seeks to find
out whether the passage under consideration teaches that forgiveness can be obtained without
the shedding of blood or not.