|
A Priestly Covenant
|
In the previous instances reviewed, God was intent (God in the ways of man) on killing men, but repented, after He saw their repentance. In the following two scenarios, “A Priestly Covenant” and “A Kingly Covenant,” God was intent on (by spoken promises) good salvific purposes. Firstly, in the priestly covenant, God was intent on perpetuating the priestly line of Ithamar which is a type of perpetuating life and salvation. Nevertheless when God saw the wickedness of the High priest, Eli, He repented of or changed His will and word! God did go back on “a perpetual statute” and “an everlasting priesthood!” A good promise/will/intent/purpose of salvific life (God in the ways of man) was changed because God beheld sinful, unrepentant rebellion in Eli. Eli’s fate was sealed by this judgment of wrath which came through a repentance in God, nevertheless, the sovereign will of God to destroy him was always unrepentant, even though it became manifest in this way. God in the ways of God, in unchanging hatred from eternity past, did predestinate Eli to be one of the many “vessels of wrath.”
Eli was the High Priest after the line of Ithamar. The lineage of priests wherein Eli was ordained was a product of a promise God made to Aaron. Ithamar and Eleazar were the only remaining sons of Aaron, and thus, they were the only remaining priestly lines. God promised them and said, “And thou shalt gird them with girdles, Aaron and his sons, and put the bonnets on them: and the priest’s office shall be theirs for a perpetual statute: and thou shalt consecrate Aaron and his sons” (Exodus 29:9). God said that they were part of an “everlasting priesthood.” God said, “And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto Me in the priest’s office: for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations” (Exodus 40:15).
With the good words perpetual and everlasting binding them into holy covenant, do you think that the sons of Aaron did entertain the possibility of damnation? Is it impossible for binding conditions to exist when a promise is said to be perpetual and everlasting? If Eli relied on the promise deceitfully, excusing fear while in disobedience, it is because he thinks that he would never lose his priesthood or salvation. This would embolden a continuance of compromise. What was Eli’s sin?
Eli sinned greatly against the Lord by not restraining his two sons from their wickedness. Eli preferred to honor his sons above the Lord. Of this God said, “Wherefore kick ye at My sacrifice and at Mine offering, which I have commanded in My habitation; and honourest thy sons above Me, to make yourselves fat with the chiefest of all the offerings of Israel My people?” (1 Samuel 2:29) Then the Lord says a staggering statement! The Lord is not hiding, worried, or afraid to make known, “I said indeed that thy house, and the house of thy father, should walk before Me for ever,” but the Lord changes His mind and goes back on what He said because of the unworthiness and guilt He observed from Eli! Why? How? God can change His mind (God in the ways of man)! Henceforth be warned, He will not honor the wicked! The Lord finishes saying to Eli…
Eli was the High Priest after the line of Ithamar. The lineage of priests wherein Eli was ordained was a product of a promise God made to Aaron. Ithamar and Eleazar were the only remaining sons of Aaron, and thus, they were the only remaining priestly lines. God promised them and said, “And thou shalt gird them with girdles, Aaron and his sons, and put the bonnets on them: and the priest’s office shall be theirs for a perpetual statute: and thou shalt consecrate Aaron and his sons” (Exodus 29:9). God said that they were part of an “everlasting priesthood.” God said, “And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto Me in the priest’s office: for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations” (Exodus 40:15).
With the good words perpetual and everlasting binding them into holy covenant, do you think that the sons of Aaron did entertain the possibility of damnation? Is it impossible for binding conditions to exist when a promise is said to be perpetual and everlasting? If Eli relied on the promise deceitfully, excusing fear while in disobedience, it is because he thinks that he would never lose his priesthood or salvation. This would embolden a continuance of compromise. What was Eli’s sin?
Eli sinned greatly against the Lord by not restraining his two sons from their wickedness. Eli preferred to honor his sons above the Lord. Of this God said, “Wherefore kick ye at My sacrifice and at Mine offering, which I have commanded in My habitation; and honourest thy sons above Me, to make yourselves fat with the chiefest of all the offerings of Israel My people?” (1 Samuel 2:29) Then the Lord says a staggering statement! The Lord is not hiding, worried, or afraid to make known, “I said indeed that thy house, and the house of thy father, should walk before Me for ever,” but the Lord changes His mind and goes back on what He said because of the unworthiness and guilt He observed from Eli! Why? How? God can change His mind (God in the ways of man)! Henceforth be warned, He will not honor the wicked! The Lord finishes saying to Eli…
|
“but now the LORD saith, Be it far from Me; for them that honour Me I will honour, and they that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed. Behold, the days come, that I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father’s house, that there shall not be an old man in thine house. And thou shalt see an enemy in My habitation, in all the wealth which God shall give Israel: and there shall not be an old man in thine house for ever. And the man of thine, whom I shall not cut off from Mine altar, shall be to consume thine eyes, and to grieve thine heart: and all the increase of thine house shall die in the flower of their age. 34 And this shall be a sign unto thee, that shall come upon thy two sons, on Hophni and Phinehas; in one day they shall die both of them. 35 And I will raise Me up a faithful priest, that shall do according to that which is in Mine heart and in My mind: and I will build him a sure house; and he shall walk before Mine anointed for ever. 36 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left in thine house shall come and crouch to him for a piece of silver and a morsel of bread, and shall say, Put me, I pray thee, into one of the priests’ offices, that I may eat a piece of bread” (1 Samuel 2:30-36).
|
This prophecy was fulfilled in the days of Solomon when Abiathar was ejected from the priesthood in 1 Kings 2:27. This rejection ended the line of Ithamar, as it is written: “So Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being priest unto the LORD; that he might fulfill the word of the LORD, which He spake concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh.” Abiathar was a son of Eli, Eli was in the line of Ithamar, and Zadok replaced Abiathar. From this point the line of Ithamar ceased to exist. If God can go back on “a perpetual statute” and “an everlasting priesthood,” can God go back on a promise for perpetual perseverance in the everlasting ordination of the New Testament priesthood of all believers (1 Pet. 2:9)? Not the priesthood of Ithamar but that of the New Covenant saints!? Regenerate Christians are called by Peter, “A Royal Priesthood” (1 Pet. 2:9)! Men argue that such words of everlasting mean, unequivocally and without condition, everlasting, but is this an oversimplification of the Covenant promise and an unbiblical, unhistorical, unscriptural interpretation? What about the word “for ever” (1 Sam. 2:35)? Is a Covenant made with the seed of Aaron different than a Covenant made with the spiritual seed of Abraham, or is it different from the Covenant made with the seed of Christ?