Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to the sons of Israel, ‘When a man or woman commits any of the sins of mankind, acting unfaithfully against the Lord, and that person is guilty, then he shall confess his sins which he has committed, and he shall make restitution in full for his wrong and add to it one-fifth of it, and give it to him whom he has wronged (Numbers 5:5-7).

Notice here that "the sins of mankind" (NIV translates as "the list of the sins of man") does not have the qualifer that limits them to unintentional sins vs. intentional sins. Even though the words "and that person is guilty" is a qualifier, this only affirms whether or not a wrong was actually committed, and it has nothing to do with intentionality. A person committing a sin unintentionally was not free from guilt (cf. Leviticus 5:17-18). The limitation here, however, seems to be to sins that a person commits against one another rather than God, especially in view of the command to make restitution "to him whom he has wronged." 

Now, although these sins were primarily against other persons, the individual committing them was still accountable to the LORD, for while they were sinning against another person, they were also "acting unfaithfully against the Lord." In fact, the sin was primarily against God rather than others because it was a breach of God's Law. This is why when David was confronted on his sin against Uriah (murder) and Bathsheba (adultery), he cried out to the LORD,

Against you, you only, have I sinned
    and done what is evil in your sight;
so you are right in your verdict
    and justified when you judge (Psalm 51:4).

Even though David wronged Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite, he ultimately sinned against God. Thus, his confession was directed to God when the prophet Nathan confronted him with his sin, and it was God who forgave him (2 Samuel 12:13).

So in our present passage, there is a two-fold command, a command to "confess his sins which he has committed" and a command to "make restitution in full for his wrong and add to it one-fifth of it, and give it to him who he has wronged." The confession was primarily, though not exclusively, directed to the LORD, and the restitution was directed to the wronged person, or to the LORD's priest if the wronged person was unable to receive it. 

Now, for certain sins, like adultery and murder, there was no restitution. These sins were punishable by death. But in the absence of at least two witnesses (cf. Deuteronomy 17:6; 19:15), it appears that death was averted, as in  the case of the woman suspected of adultery in the following passage (cf. Numbers 5:11-31 esp. 5:13). 

When we come to the New Testament, there is no extensive prescriptions for restitution, but there is an emphasis on forgiveness and clearing of debt. This what the LORD does for us when we confess our sins to Him, and this is what He expects believers to do for each other:

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9).

Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you (Colossians 3:13).

Friends, while I have argued before that there is no place for forgiveness where there is no acknowledgement of sin, when there is confession, let us be ready and quick to forgive. For in this way we reflect the far greater forgiveness the LORD has given to us (cf. Matthew 18:21-35). 

As you read today's text a number of ladies may take offense at Numbers 5:11-31. On the face it sounds like a double standard. Here's a very detailed and embarrassing procedure a woman has to undergo if her husband is suspicious of her; however, there is no counterpart for the man. And if it is proven that there is no basis for the suspicion, there is no reprimand for the husband (Numbers 5:31). What's up?!

This is perhaps one of many such passages like it. There is no double standard here but a distinction is made between the man and the woman, though not with respect to guilt. If one or the other is shown to be guilty of infidelity, it is punishable by death. However, while the woman is responsible to her husband, the husband is directly answerable to God. This principle of the order of accountability is reflected also in the New Testament in passages like 1 Corinthians 11:3,

But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

The Israelites were to observe God’s revealed line of authority consistently. A man was directly responsible to God, but a woman was directly responsible to her father (if unmarried) or her husband (if married). Thus a wife was responsible to her husband in a sense in which the husband was not responsible to his wife. Perhaps God Himself retained the responsibility for judging a husband who was unfaithful to his wife (cf. Heb. 13:4).

Furthermore, this procedure protected the wife of an extremely jealous husband who might continually accuse her. He would suffer shame by her innocence since this was a public ceremony. So, while there may have been embarrassment for the wife, there would be no less shame for the husband.

In today's feministic environment that emphasizes the equality of the sexes, such explanations may be unacceptable; however, I hope our believing ladies will perceive that the distinctions that the Bible makes between men and women are not value distinctions but distinctions of order, function and accountability. This same distinction of order, function and accountability exists within the Godhead, between the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, but no one would suggest that any One held greater value or worth over the Others. In the same way, let us embrace the biblical distinctions for men and women while acknowledging the equality of their worth.