This is a deliberate and superficial distinction to divide atonement methods for unintentional and intentional sins. There are two facts which this modern tradition deny: 1) there is no atonement without blood; the act of personal repentance is not substitute to the sacrificial system, but both are two sides of same coin; both are necessary for forgiveness. (2) the sacrificial atonement covers all sins. However the scholars created exception for exceptional rebellious people.
Writing in the Encyclopedia Judaica, Anson F. Rainey, a professor at
Tel Aviv University and a foremost biblical and Semitic scholar,
provided these important insights: The prophets of the First Temple
period often spoke out against sacrificial ritual (Amos 5:21-27; Hos.
6:6; Micah 6:6-8; Isa. 1:11-17; Jer. 6:20; 7:21-22). Righteous and
just behavior along with obedience to the Lord are contrasted with the
conduct of rituals unaccompanied by proper ethical and more attitudes
(Amos 5:24; Micah 6:8; Isa. 1:16-17; Jer. 7:23). It has thus been
assumed by many scholars that the prophets condemned all sacrificial
rituals. [The Catholic biblical scholar Roland] De Vaux has shown the
absurdity of such a conclusion since Isaiah 1:15 also condemns prayer.
No one holds that the prophets rejected prayer; it was prayer offered
without the proper moral commitment that was being denounced; the same
holds true for the oracles against formal rituals. Similar allusions
in the Psalms which might be taken as a complete rejection of
sacrifice (e.g., 40:7-8; 50:8-15) actually express the same concern
for inner attitude as the prophets. The wisdom literature sometimes
reflects the same concern for moral and ethical values over empty
sacerdotal acts (Prov. 15:8, 21:3, 27). Certain other statements by
Amos (5:25) and Jeremiah (7:22) have been taken to mean that the
prophets knew nothing of a ritual practice followed in the wilderness
experience of Israel. De Vaux has noted that Jeremiah clearly knew
Deuteronomy 12:6-14 and regarded it as the Law of Moses. The prophetic
oracles against sacrifice in the desert are really saying that the
original Israelite sacrificial system was not meant to be the empty,
hypocritical formalism practiced by their contemporaries. The demand
by Hosea for “mercy not sacrifice…knowledge of God more than burnt
offerings” (Hos. 6:6; cf. Matt. 9:13; 12:7) is surely to be taken as
relative, a statement of priorities (cf. also I Sam. 15:22). The inner
attitude was prerequisite to any valid ritual expression (Isa. 29:13).
Foreign elements that had penetrated the Israelite sacrificial system,
were of course, roundly condemned by the prophets. Such was especially
the case with Israel (Amos 4:5; Hos. 2:13-15; 4:11-13; 13:2) but also
in Judah (Jer. 7:17-18; Ezek. 8; et al.). 124
also
The rabbis (see b. Shevu’ot 2b; 6b-14a) comment specifically on the
words rebellion (transgressions in Hebrew) and sins, explaining that
“transgressions” refers to acts of rebellion – which are certainly
intentional – while “sins” refers to inadvertent acts. 232 And it is
the goat whose blood is sprinkled in the Most Holy Place that effects
atonement for the people, just as the blood of the bull offered up by
the High Priest effects atonement for him (m . Shevu’ot 1:7, following
Lev. 16:11, “Aaron shall bring the bull for his own sin offering to
make atonement for himself and his household, and he is to slaughter
the bull for his own sin offering.”). – Brown, Answering Jewish
Objections to Jesus, Volume 2, Theological Objections, p. 131 To
further emphasize the vital connection between blood and atonement,
let me cite the observations made by the two most important Talmud
commentaries (Rashi and Tosafot) to this Rabbinic dictum that “there
is no atonement without blood.” Rashi states that “the fundamental
principle (‘iqqar) of atonement is in the blood” (b. Yoma 5a).
Tosafot, also discussing the Talmudic statement that there is no
atonement without blood, makes reference to a passage found elsewhere
in the Talmud (b. Pesahim 59b) that indicated that the priests had to
eat certain specified sacrifices if those offering were to have their
atoning effect. 180 Tosafot then concludes, “But in any case, the
fundamental principle [again, ‘iqqar] of atonement doesn’t exist
without blood.” (b. Zevahim 6a). – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections
to Jesus, Volume 2, Theological Objections, p. 109-110
The offense outline here [in Lev 5:17-19 , or 6:1-7 in most English
translations] were quite definitely intentional! A person
misappropriated property or funds entrusted to his safekeeping, or
defrauded another, or failed to restore lost property he had
located….If, subsequently, the accused came forth on his own and
admitted to having lied under oath – thus assuming liability for the
unrecovered property – he was given the opportunity to clear himself
by making restitution and by paying a fine of 20 percent to the
aggrieved party. Having lied under oath, he had also offended God and
was obliged to offer an ‘asham sacrifice in expiation….God accepts the
expiation even of one who swears falsely in His name because the
guilty person is willing to make restitution to the victim of his
crime. 224 – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume 2,
Theological Objections, p. 128
As codified and explained by Maimonides almost one thousand years later (Laws of Repentance, 1:2):
Since the goat sent [to Azazeil] 229 atones for all of Israel, the
High Priest confesses on it as the spokesman for all Israel, as [Lev.
16:21] states: “He shall confess on it all the sins of the Children of
Israel.” The goat sent to Azazeil atones for all the transgressions in
the Torah, the severe and the lighter [sins]; those violated
intentionally and those transgressed inadvertently; those which [the
transgressor] became conscious of and those which he was not conscious
of. All are atoned for by the goat sent [to Azazeil]. This applies
only if one repents. If one does not repent, the goat only atones for
the light [sins]. Which are light sins and which are severe ones?
Severe sins are those which are punishable by execution by the court
or by premature death [karet]. [The violation of] the other
prohibitions that are not punishable by premature death are considered
light [sins]. 230 – Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus,
Volume 2, Theological Objections, p. 130
for more sources and details see http://www.biblestudying.net/rabbinic1.html
Lev (16:5, 16) Since the goat sent [to Azazel] atones for all of Israel, the High Priest confesses upon it as a spokesman for all of Israel as [Leviticus 16:21] states: "He shall confess upon it all the sins of the children of Israel."
The goat sent to Azazel atones for all the transgressions in the Torah, the severe and the lighter [sins]; those violated intentionally and those transgressed inadvertently; those which [the transgressor] became conscious of and those which he was not conscious of. All are atoned for by the goat sent [to Azazel]. http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/911888/jewish/Teshuvah-Chapter-One.htm