We move on this week into the First Book of Samuel. Now we're getting into some interesting theology.
1 Sam 2: 12-18 - Now the sons of Eli were scoundrels; they had no regard for the Lord or for the duties of the priests to the people. When anyone offered sacrifice, the priest's servant would come, while the meat was boiling, with a three-pronged fork in his hand, and he would thrust it into the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot; all that the fork brought up the priest would take for himself. This is what they did at Shiloh to all the Israelites who came there. Moreover, before the fat was burned, the priest's servant would come and say to the one who was sacrificing, "Give meat for the priest to roast; for he will not accept boiled meat from you, but only raw." And if the man said to him, "Let them burn the fat first, and then take whatever you wish," he would say, "No, you must give it now; if not, I will take it by force." Thus the sin of the young men was very great in the sight of the Lord; for they treated the offerings of the Lord with contempt.
1Sam 2:22-25 Now Eli was very old. He heard all that his sons were doing to all Israel, and how they lay with the women who served at the entrance to the tent of meeting. He said to them, "Why do you do such things? For I hear of your evil dealings from all these people. No, my sons; it is not a good report that I hear the people of the Lord spreading abroad. If one person sins against another, someone can intercede for the sinner with the Lord; but if someone sins against the Lord, who can make intercession?" But they would not listen to the voice of their father; for it was the will of the Lord to kill them.
Before I start looking into this text, a note: I cut out 4 verses in the middle that were relating to the birth of Samuel that appeared to have exactly nothing to do with the passage we're studying. I mention this for those who were curious.
Anyway, it sure starts out looking like Eli's sons are some very naughty priests -- good fodder for object lessons, I guess. I found the next section of the story quite interesting, though. It appears to be a statement of part of the central message of Christianity -- that when someone sins against God, no "regular" person can make peace between that someone and God. I thought it interesting (as a side note) that when one person harms (sins against) another person, it appears that God still gets offended and needs to be appeased for some odd reason.
When I read the last part of this, I sort of got the impression that it was saying that the sons refused to listen to their father's advice because God had already decided to kill them -- in other words, they had no free will in the matter. One believer I talked with on this passage told me I misunderstood the statement, but I never got around to an elaboration on his view. If anyone would care to take up the point, I'd be very interested in hearing about it.
