Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

Discussion Jumpstarter

Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 10
The teacher highlights two Leviticus details that he says should unsettle cheap views of atonement: (a) Origen’s point that priests must “know and understand [their] own sin” to sympathize, fulfilled perfectly in Jesus who offers not only sacrifice but “victory and power,” and (b) “nowhere in the law” is there a sacrifice for intentional sin—only unintentional/ignorance—so there was never a built-in “I’ll sin and sacrifice later” system; how do those claims confront modern “grace” talk, especially around assurance and habitual sin, and what would repentance look like if you believed grace is power to overcome rather than cover to continue?
Another way to ask: If Leviticus doesn’t allow a plan of “sin now, sacrifice later,” and if grace is meant to give power to change, how does that challenge how we talk about grace and assurance today? What would real repentance look like if you believed grace helps you overcome sin, not keep living in it?
Discussion Jumpstarter

Direct Answer
Based on the speaker’s teaching, cheap “grace” talk is confronted by two realities: true priestly help involves honest awareness of sin and sympathy, and the sacrificial system never legitimized planned, intentional sin. Repentance, then, is not sinning with a backup plan, but turning with a “blameless heart” and coming to Jesus for mercy that also gives power to overcome.

Support from Transcript:
  • Origen quote: the priest’s admirable trait is not sinlessness, but that “he knows and understands his own sin,” so he can sympathize.
  • The speaker connects this to Hebrews 4: Jesus sympathizes with weaknesses, was tempted “yet without sin,” so we can “come boldly… obtain mercy… find grace to help.”
  • He emphasizes Jesus is greater: OT priests “could only offer sacrifices,” but Jesus offers “victory and power… a way out… help… to overcome.”
  • He states: “nowhere in the law does it give a sacrifice for intentional sin, only… ignorance and unintentional sins.”
  • He rejects a quid pro quo mindset: not “I’m going to sin… then… offer a sacrifice,” but sacrifices were for someone living by God’s laws who wants “to make things right” with others and God.
Discussion Follow-ups How has your definition of grace drifted toward permission rather than transformation? If you believed grace is ‘help in time of need,’ what would change this week in confession, restitution, and resisting repeat sin?