Leviticus 5:17

), that is, he was not very certain; in this case, because it is good to be sure, he must bring his trespass-offering, and the value of that which he feared he had embezzled, only he was not to add the fifth part to it.

quarantine:debris (2026-07-29) — leading-punctuation+unbalanced-parens

And if a soul sin, and commit any of these things which are forbidden to be done by the commandments of the Lord,.... Respecting holy things: though he wist it not; or did not know that he had transgressed a negative command: yet he is guilty, and shall bear the iniquity; be chargeable with guilt, and is liable to punishment, and must make an atonement and satisfaction for it; see Luk 12:48.

if a soul sin . . . though he wist it not, yet is he guilty--This also refers to holy things, and it differs from the preceding in being one of the doubtful cases,--that is, where conscience suspects, though the understanding be in doubt whether criminality or sin has been committed.

quarantine:debris (2026-07-29) — starts-lowercase

IT is supposed in our text that men might commit forbidden things without knowing it. No, it is not merely supposed, but it is taken for granted and provided for. The Levitical law had special statutes for sins of ignorance and one of its sections begins with these words, "If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord." If you will, at your leisure, read the 4th and 5th chapters of Leviticus, you will find, first of all, it is supposed that a priest may sin. They knew nothing of infallible priests and infallible popes under the Mosaic Law! It was known and recognized that priests might sin and sin through ignorance, too. "The priest's lips should keep knowledge," but as they were compassed with infirmities, they learned to have compassion on the ignorant by being made, themselves, conscious that they were not perfect in understanding. In the 4th chapter a sacrifice is prescribed for "the priest that is anointed, if he sins according to the sin of the people." The highest in office, who ought to be best read in the things of God, might, nevertheless, err through misunderstanding, forgetfulness, or ignorance. The priests were teachers, but they needed, also, to be taught. As Trapp says, "The sins of teachers are teachers of sins" and, therefore, they were not overlooked but had to be expiated by trespass offerings. Further on in the chapter it is supposed that a ruler may sin (see verse 22). A ruler should be thoroughly acquainted with the Law which he has to dispense, but yet he might not know every point and, therefore, might err. Therefore it is written, "When a ruler has sinned, and done somewhat through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord his God concerning things which should not be done, and is guilty.

IT is supposed in our text that men might commit forbidden things without knowing it. No, it is not merely supposed, but it is taken for granted and provided for. The Levitical law had special statutes for sins of ignorance and one of its sections begins with these words, "If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord." If you will, at your leisure, read the 4th and 5th chapters of Leviticus, you will find, first of all, it is supposed that a priest may sin.