In a way, I kind of feel sorry for the Pharisees.
Not too much, mind you, but whenever I read passages like Numbers 5:6, I can’t help but think about all the different ways verses like that could be (and probably were) misinterpreted.
On the surface, it’s relatively straightforward: If someone commits a “sin of mankind” against someone else, then that person must pay it back, plus a 20% fine. If the person that was offended happens to be dead, then you pay that fine and the reimbursement to the surviving family member. Piece of cake.
But what exactly is a “sin of mankind”? The term is broad enough that you could feasibly fit quite a lot under the umbrella of interpretation, but that’s not how the Old Testament has been so far. Leviticus and Numbers, to this point, have been meticulous in their definition of law. Every bit of minutiae has been covered.
Most scholars view Numbers 5:6 as a companion passage to Leviticus 6:1-5, which describes things stolen or taken by extortion. This would certainly classify as a “sin against mankind”—since it was done person to person—but doesn’t quite seem to match up to the intensity of Numbers 5:6.
That could be the point, though. Instead of explaining the crime itself (which Leviticus 6 does), Numbers chooses to point out the real impact of the sin—the effect on the other person.
If we hold to the Biblical precept that all men are created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27), and see that murder is a destruction of that image (Genesis 9:6), then theft or extortion is likewise a crime against God Himself. You’re stealing from man, to be sure, but you’re also stealing from God, since man is made in His image.
Think about this verse in connection with the story of Zaccheus in Luke 19. He was a “wee little man” (as the story goes), so he climbed up in a tree to look for Jesus.
But he was also a tax collector, and those people had a reputation for extorting their fellow Jews out of excessive taxes. When Jesus stopped to talk to him, the people grumbled about it, arguing that Jesus was spending time with a sinner.
Zaccheus’ response to this slander? “If I have defrauded anyone, I will pay back four times as much.” Not 20%…but 400%.
The intent is fine, and I think is clearly indicative of a repentant heart. But there are two lessons to pull from that connection.
The first is the need for repentance every time we wrong someone. It’s not enough to just be sorry, you have to actually make it right. That’s what repentance literally is.
The second is the grace that God extends to others. When most people feel cheated by their fellow man, 20% isn’t usually enough. We want more. We want it all!
But for God, a 20% restitution for extorting your brother is what’s required. Not a penny more.
That’s grace.
