Abstract
Confession and forgiveness in Leviticus
The question addressed in this article is whether there is a link between confession and forgiveness in priestly thinking. The Hebrew verb (hitpaelof ידה) for the act of confessing is found only in chapters 5, 16 and 26 of Leviticus, and the verb for the act of forgiving (niphal of סלח) is found only in chapters 4, 5 and 19. The only chapter in which they occur together is chapter 5, and they are not found in the same pericope. If forgiveness and confession are thus not directly linked, why are people sometimes forgiven? And why is confession necessary at other times? In addition to engaging with the work of Milgrom (1975 and 1991) and his answers for these questions, the article focuses on the three texts where confession is required.
Leviticus 4 and 5 are discussed together. Chapter 4 is concerned with sins committed unintentionally and consists of five pericopes. In most of these one finds combinations of כפר and סלח towards the end of the pericopes. The question is why people are forgiven if there has been no confession. To answer this question Milgrom’s (1975) arguments are invoked. First, the article takes a look at the possible meaning of the verb אשׁם, “to be guilty”. Whereas many scholars argue for an objective meaning, Milgrom has, through the years, argued for a subjective meaning. For him the verb implies that a person feels guilty and already shows some remorse. This remorse and the working of the חַטָּאת sacrifice, combined with the fact that these sins were committed unintentionally, make forgiveness possible. After pointing out the weaknesses in Milgrom’s understanding, the article also presents the view of Sklar (2005 and 2023), who understands the verb as “suffering the consequences of guilt”.
The article then moves on to explaining the verb כפר, often translated with atonement or reconciliation. It offers two options: understanding atonement as an act of cleansing the sanctuary (Milgrom’s view) or as an act of paying a ransom (Sklar). After concluding that priestly language is not always as exact as we would like it to be, the article moves to a consideration of chapter 5.
Leviticus 5 introduces the concept of אָשָׁם, which functions in two ways in this chapter: as an umbrella term that includes a process of restitution and as a sacrificial term. In the first pericope (vv. 1–13) we are introduced to the idea of confession for the first time (v. 5). The person who has committed the sin has to confess and bring a חַטָּאת sacrifice. If he is poor, one of two cheaper options is possible. The sins of neglect of verses 1–13 are, according to Milgrom, changed by confession into the בִּשְׁגָגָה sins described in chapter 4.
In the other two pericopes in chapter 5 (vv. 14–19 and 20–26) there is no mention of confession, but besides the אָשָׁם sacrifice, the person who sinned needs to add 20% to the value of the sacrificial animal; or in verses 20–26, which describe sins committed on purpose, the thing wrongfully taken needs to be returned and 20% added to it, and an אָשָׁם sacrifice has to be performed. Most of the cases in Leviticus 5 which fall under the umbrella use of אָשָׁם thus require more than just a sacrifice, but also other actions for atonement and restitution to take place. Confession is such an extra element in the first pericope, and the 20% addition, or the return of the thing taken plus 20%, become extra elements in the rest of the chapter. Why is confession not needed in these two cases? Milgrom’s understanding cannot provide an answer.
The next time confession is mentioned in Leviticus is in chapter 16 with the Day of Reconciliation. Three animals are designated as חַטָּאת sacrifices. Of these three, two are slaughtered. A bull is slaughtered for Aaron and his sons, and Aaron takes some of this blood and brings it into the most holy part, where he sprinkles the blood in front of the mercy seat. The goat for the people is also slaughtered and its blood is treated similarly. In this part of the text (vv. 11–20) the verb כפר is pervasive and Milgrom’s understanding of blood cleansing the sanctuary makes sense here. But then the text moves to the other חַטָּאת goat and the כפר language disappears to make place for a different, not to mention bloodless, ritual. In verse 21 Aaron places both his hands on the head of this goat and confesses the iniquities, transgressions and sins over the head of the goat. By means of this act of confession, the iniquities are transferred to the goat, which then carries them into the desert. It is clear that confession works differently here from the way it worked in 5:5. It does not bring about כפר, but resorts to the metaphorical language of “carrying away” the transgressions of the people.
The act of confession appears again in Leviticus 26, which is generally considered the book's initial conclusion and part of the Holiness Legislation. The chapter consists mostly of promises and threats. Verses 3–13 paint a beautiful picture of an Israelite society living in peace and having enough to eat. This can happen only when Israel obeys, but if they do not, then the threats of verses 14–39 apply, painting a dismal picture of Israel eventually ending up in the land of their enemies, an apparent reference to the exile. In verses 40–45 there is a clear change in the tone of text, as the text becomes more affirmative and seems to anticipate a positive future. This change is triggered by the addressees’ confessing their iniquities in the land of their enemies. Verses 40–45 use a lot of the vocabulary prevalent in the first two confessional texts, but also assume a context where there is no sacrificial cult. This confession results in God’s remembering his covenant with earlier generations, and there the text takes a much more positive turn in verses 40–45. The article engages with the work of Boda (2009), who argues that the suffering of the addressees in the land of their enemies is what pays for their sins, as sacrifices often do in other parts of Leviticus.
The article concludes that there is no unifying view of confession in the book of Leviticus. In Leviticus 5:6 it is part of a process which involves a חַטָּאת sacrifice, which leads to כפר and restitution. In Leviticus 16:20 the act of confession facilitates the transfer of iniquities from the people to the goat without any blood or use of כפר language. Leviticus 26:40 may echo parts of Leviticus, but כפר language is also absent, as is any blood sacrifice. The act of confession now opens possibilities for the future and reminds YHWH of his earlier covenant.
Keywords: atonement; confession; Day of Reconciliation; exile; forgiveness; guilt; Holiness Legislation; Leviticus; reconciliation; sacrificial cult
- This article’s featured image was created by cottonbro studio and obtained from Pexels.
Lees die volledige artikel in Afrikaans
The post Confession and forgiveness in Leviticus first appeared on LitNet.
The post Confession and forgiveness in Leviticus appeared first on LitNet.