Smith's Bible Dictionary.pdf - Online Christian Library

Smith's Bible Dictionary
Simri
(vigilant), properly Shimri, son of Hosah, a Merarite Levite in the reign of David. (1 Chronicles
26:10)
Sin
a city of Egypt, mentioned only by Ezekiel. (Ezekiel 30:15,16) The name is Hebrew, or at least
Semitic, perhaps signifying clay . It is identified in the Vulgate with Pelusium, “the clayey or
muddy” town. Its antiquity may perhaps be inferred from the mention of “the wilderness of Sin”
in the journeys of the Israelites. (Exodus 16:1; Numbers 33:11) Ezekiel speaks of Sin as “Sin the
strongholds of Egypt.” (Ezekiel 30:15) This place was held by Egypt from that time until the period
of the Romans. Herodotus relates that Sennacherib advanced against Pelusium, and that near
Pelusium Cambyses defeated Psammenitus. In like manner the decisive battle in which Ochus
defeated the last native king, Nectanebes, was fought near this city.
Sin Offering
The sin offering among the Jews was the sacrifice in which the ideas of propitiation and of
atonement for sin were most distinctly marked. The ceremonial of the sin offering is described in
Levi 4 and 6. The trespass offering is closely connected with the sin offering in Leviticus, but at
the same time clearly distinguished from it, being in some cases offered with it as a distinct part of
the same sacrifice; as, for example, in the cleansing of the leper. Levi 14. The distinction of
ceremonial clearly indicates a difference in the idea of the two sacrifices. The nature of that difference
is still a subject of great controversy. We find that the sin offerings were—
•Regular . (a) For the whole people, at the New Moon, Passover, Pentecost, Feast of Trumpets and
Feast of Tabernacles, (Numbers 28:15-29; 38:1) ... besides the solemn offering of the two goats
on the Great Day of Atonement. Levi 16 (B) For the priests and Levites at their consecration,
(Exodus 29:10-14,36) besides the yearly sin offering (a, bullock) for the high priest on the Great
Day of Atonement. (Leviticus 16:2) Special . For any sin of “ignorance” and the like recorded in
Levi 4 and 5. It is seen that in the law most of the sins which are not purely ceremonial are called
sins of “ignorance,” see (Hebrews 9:7) and in Numb 15:30 It is expressly said that while such sins
call be atoned for by offerings, “the soul that doeth aught presumptuously ” (Heb. with a high
hand) “shall be cut off from among his people.” “His iniquity shall he upon him.” Comp. (Hebrews
10:20) But here are sufficient indications that the sins here called “of ignorance” are more strictly
those of “negligence” or “frailty” repented of by the unpunished offender, as opposed to those of
deliberate and unrepentant sin. It is clear that two classes of sacrifices, although distinct, touch
closely upon each other. It is also evident that the sin offering was the only regular and general
recognition of sin in the abstract and accordingly was for more solemn and symbolical in it’s
ceremonial; the trespass offering was confined to special cases, most of which related to the doing
of some material damage, either to the holy things or to man. Josephus declares that the sin offering
is presented by those “who fall into sin in ignorance.” and the trespass offering by “one who has
sinned and is conscious of his sin. But has no one to convict him thereof.” Without attempting to
decide so difficult and so controverted a question, we may draw the following conclusions. First,
that the sin offering was for the more solemn and comprehensive of the two sacrifices. Secondly,
that the sin offering looked more to the guilt of the sin done, irrespective of its consequences,
while the trespass offering looked to the evil consequences of sin, either against the service of
God or against man, and to the duty of atonement, as far as atonement was possible. Thirdly, that
in the sin offering especially we find symbolized the acknowledgment of sinfulness as inherent
696
William Smith