Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 2:25
If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him: but if a man sin against the LORD, who shall entreat for him? Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because the LORD would slay them.
25. If one man &c.] Better,
If a man sin against a man, then Elohim shall judge him:
but if a man sin against Jehovah, who shall intercede for him?
For man’s offences against his fellow-man, there is a third superior party to arbitrate and rectify the wrongs, namely God, or God’s representative, the duly appointed judge: but for man’s offences against Jehovah, there is no third superior party to intercede as a mediator.
This is most likely an ancient proverb, quoted by Eli to impress his sons with a sense of the enormity of their sins, which were committed against Jehovah. The point is obscured by the impossibility of translating the paronomasia of the Hebrew which expresses “judge” and “intercede” by different voices of the same verb.
the judge ] Heb. Elhm, i.e. God. Judges, as the representatives of God in executing justice on earth (Deu 1:17), are sometimes styled gods (Exo 21:6; Exo 22:8-9; Psa 82:1; Psa 82:6), but it seems best not to limit the present passage to human judgments.
because the Lord would slay them ] Literally, was pleased to slay them. Compare the language of Exo 4:21, and Jos 11:20, where we read that the Lord hardened the hearts of Pharaoh and the Canaanites; and 1Sa 16:14, where it is said that “an evil spirit from the Lord troubled Saul.” Yet we are assured that “the Lord delighteth in mercy” (Mic 7:18), and “hath no pleasure in the death of him that dieth” (Eze 18:32). This coexistence of mercy and judgment in the divine will (Exo 34:6-7) is a mystery which necessarily transcends our comprehension. But it must be carefully noted that it is not till Pharaoh has turned a deaf ear to repeated warnings, not till the Canaanites have polluted themselves with intolerable abominations, that God hardens their hearts; not till Eli’s sons have ignored His existence and defied His laws docs He determine to slay them: not till Saul has set at naught his calling and deserted God, is he deserted by Him. Obstinate impenitence may be judicially punished by the withdrawal of the grace which leads to repentance.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The sense seems to be, If one man sin against another, the judge shall amerce him in the due penalty, and then he shall be free; but if he sin against the Lord, who shall act the part of judge and arbiter for him? His guilt must remain to the great day of judgment.
Because the Lord would slay them – There is a sense in which whatever comes to pass is the accomplishment of Gods sovereign will and pleasure, and all the previous steps, even when they involve moral causes, by which this will and pleasure are brought about, are in this sense also brought about by God. How this truth, which reason and revelation alike acknowledge, consists with mans free will on the one hand; or, when the evil deeds and punishment of a sinner are some of the previous steps, with Gods infinite mercy and love on the other, is what cannot possibly be explained. We can only firmly believe both statements,
(1) that God hath no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, and that He willeth not the death of a sinner, but rather that he should be converted and live;
(2) that the sins and the punishments of sin are accomplishments of Gods eternal purpose (compare the marginal references, and Isa 6:9-10; Mar 4:12; Rom 9:15). It may be explained by saying that in the case of Hophni and Phinehas Gods will to kill them was founded upon His foreknowledge of their impenitence; while from another point of view, in which Gods will is the fixed point, that impenitence may be viewed in its relation to that fixed point, and so dependent upon it, and a necessary step to it.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
1Sa 2:25
If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him.
The sinners friend
Even had we no revelation on the subject, a future judgment would be inferred by us from reason; for we should be led by analogy to conclude, that, as when one man sinned against another the judge judged him and awarded his punishment, so God would certainly enter into judgment with those who sinned against Him. We are taught it in Gods dealings both with individuals and nations; we are told it in the plainest terms. We see it, in the expulsion of our guilty first parents from the once happy Eden. We see it, in the fire and brimstone which consumed Sodom and Gomorrah. If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him. Thanks be to God for this arrangement: judges are his vicegerents on earth, and bear the sword for Him. Thankful ought we to be for this blessing; for laws and magistrates and judges–the powers that be–are ordained of God. Without them, the bonds of society would be broken in sunder; the bonds of iniquity would everywhere prevail. If when one man sins against another, the judge judges and condemns him, what shall be done when God cometh to judgment? If an earthly judge can punish severely a sinner on earth, how shall not God terribly judge and punish sinners in His great day! If a judge can pass sentence for the punishment of a mans person or the taking away of his life here, how much more shall God pass sentence on the soul for an eternal hereafter! If there be none to put in an arrest of judgment for a condemned sinner now, who shall entreat, who shall save, when God shall pass judgment then? If the whole of the machinery employed for putting in force laws passed by man on earth, be of an arresting and startling nature, how much more when God shall enter into judgment with the breakers of His law! If an accused person on trial here would employ an able advocate to plead his cause, how much more shall we need and desire the help of one to entreat for us when standing at the bar of God! If we anxiously watch the chain and tissue of evidence produced before the judge in courts of assize holden here, shall we not with intense solicitude mark the evidence produced from the books which are to be opened and exposed to view in that great day. God has denounced His judgment against sin, and has passed the sentence on the sinner, the soul that sinneth it shall die. Now Gods truth and Gods justice are the pillars which support His throne; and these, admitting of no room for the exhibition of unconditional mercy, demand the execution of the sentence, part of which has already taken effect, the other part is hanging over our heads. In Adam we are all dead; on account of his sin in paradise, guilt and ruin were entailed upon us: we are partakers in his fall and in the consequences of his fall, he being our covenant head. And, must this be our inevitable doom–must all mankind perish everlastingly? because we have all sinned against the Lord, is there none to entreat for us? It was so once. God the Father planned the scheme of a vicarious sacrifice: God the Son, by assuming human nature and dying in its form, offered that sacrifice in the very person of the sinner. But are there any here who look to some other than Christ to entreat for them? The hope is vain. The expectation cannot be realised. There is but one mediator between God and man, and that Mediator is Christ. No creature can entreat for another: the desperateness of our case is so great, that the united force of men and angels can never reach it. Are there any, who fondly hope that they have no need of a Saviour to entreat for them? who put their trust in good deeds? This is a delusive hope. Here, then, I come to the practical part of my subject. We must all stand before the judgment seat: we shall all need Jesus Christ to entreat for us with God then. I beseech you, then, to flee for refuge to Him, that Saviour who gave Himself a ransom for all. Make Him your friend now, and you shall not lack one to entreat for you when the heavens are riven, and the Almighty Judge descends to hold that grand assize, which will award to all their everlasting doom. (E. J. Wilcocks, M. A.)
If a man sin against the Lord who shall entreat for him?—
Reasons why man cannot entreat for us
1. Man cannot entreat for you because he is of your class. We are all in the same boat. One man has sinned one way, another a different way; but they are both sinners. The difficulty is that a man thinks that because another does not sin in his way, the other is the greater sinner. That is the mischief.
2. Again, man cannot entreat for us, because the offence is not against man.
3. No man can entreat for us because he does not know what the offence is, and nobody else can help him to know. Black never looks so black as when it is against white. The sun does not make the dust, the sun reveals it. We cannot see our offence, as its far-reaching, its depth, its corruptness, its awfulness; only God knows what sin is. Who then shall entreat? Here comes the great Gospel of Grace. Jesus did not die instead of us, He died for us. He says: I only came to meet this great problem; reconciliation must come by grace; eternity must help time; the heavens must come to redeem the earth. I have come to seek and to save that which was lost. If one man sin against another judge and save him, but if a man sin against God, how then? (Christian Weekly.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 25. If one man sin against another] All differences between man and man may be settled by the proper judge; but if a man sin against the Supreme Judge, God himself, who shall reconcile him to his Maker? Your sin is immediately against God himself, and is the highest insult that can be offered, because it is in the matter of his own worship, therefore ye may expect his heaviest judgments.
But if a man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him?] This was a question of the most solemn importance under the old covenant, especially after the death of Moses, the mediator. The law had determined what sins should be punished with death; and it was supposed that there was not any appeal from the decision there pronounced. 1Jo 2:1 is an answer to this question; but it is an answer which the Gospel alone can give: My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not; but if any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.
Because the Lord would slay them.] The particle ki, which we translate because, and thus make their continuance in sin the effect of God’s determination to destroy them, should be translated therefore, as it means in many parts of the sacred writings. See Noldius’s Particles, where the very text in question is introduced: Sed non auscultarunt, c., IDEO voluit Jehova eos interficere “But they would not hearken, c. THEREFORE God purposed to destroy them.” It was their not hearkening that induced the Lord to will their destruction.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
If one man sin against another, by doing any injury.
The judge shall judge him; the magistrate shall by his sentence end the difference, and both parties shall acquiesce in his determination, and so the breach shall be made up. The sense is, if only man be wronged, man can right it, and reconcile the persons.
If a man sin against the Lord, to wit, in such manner as you have done, directly and immediately, in the matters of his worship and service, wilfully and presumptuously.
Who shall entreat for him? the offence is of so high a nature, that few or none will dare to intercede for him, but will leave him to the just judgment of God. He speaks after the manner of men, who do oft intercede with the prince for such as have injured any private person; but will not presume to do so when the injury is committed against his own person. The words are, and may be thus rendered,
Who shall judge for him? Who shall interpose himself as umpire, or arbitrator, between God and him? Who shall compound that difference? None can or dare do it, and therefore he must be left to the dreadful, but righteous judgment of God; which is your case and misery. Because the Lord would slay them, i.e. because God hath determined to destroy them for their many and great sins; and therefore would not and did not give them grace to hearken to Elis counsel, and to repent of their wickedness, but hardened their hearts to their destruction.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
25. they hearkened not unto thevoice of their father, because it shouldbe therefore.
the Lord would slay themItwas not God’s preordination, but their own wilful and impenitentdisobedience which was the cause of their destruction.
1Sa2:27-35. A PROPHECY AGAINSTELI’S HOUSE.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him, c. When one man does an injury to another in his person and property, the case is brought before the judge, he hears it, examines into it, and determines upon it, and does justice, orders that the injured person have satisfaction made him, and so the matter is ended:
but if a man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him? all sin is in some sense against God, as it is contrary to his nature, and a breach of his law, and especially bold, daring, presumptuous sins but there are some sins that are more immediately and particularly against God, as sins against the first table of the law, which relate to the worship of God, and such were the sins of Eli’s sons in the affair of sacrifices; all sin against God is aggravated by the perfections of his nature, and made tremendous, as being against a God of strict justice, of unspotted purity and holiness, and who is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent; and by the relation and connection there is between God and men, he is their Creator and Preserver, the God of their lives and mercies, and of all the blessings they enjoy, and yet sin against him! who will entreat the favour of God for such persons, ask pardon for them, and beseech the Lord to be propitious and merciful to them? who on earth will do it? such persons are scarce and rare, few care to stand up in the gap between God and sinners; in some cases they ought not, in others they cannot. Eli suggests by this question, that he could not, even for his own sons; and who in heaven can or will do it? not saints departed, who know nothing of what is done below, nor angels, only the Lord Jesus Christ; he is the only Mediator between God and men, who has engaged his heart to approach unto God, and interpose between him and sinful men, and has made peace and reconciliation by his blood, and is become the propitiation for sin, and ever lives to make intercession for transgressors, and is always prevalent and successful in his mediation and intercession; excepting him, there is none to entreat for those that have sinned against the Lord, see 1Jo 2:1. In answer to this question, who shall entreat for him? the Jews say x repentance and good works; but these are insufficient advocates for a sinner, without the atoning sacrifice of Christ, who is propitiation for sin, and upon which a plea can only be founded:
notwithstanding, they hearkened not unto the voice of their father; to his reproofs and counsels, his reasonings and expostulations; though his rebukes were so gentle, and this last reasoning of his so close and strong, so nervous and striking:
because the Lord would slay them; it was his purpose and decree, his will and pleasure, to cut them off for their wickedness; wherefore he gave them up to a judicial blindness, and hardness of heart, as he did Pharaoh, so that they were proof against all advice, admonitions, and arguments used with them: some choose to read the words, “therefore the Lord would slay them” y, because they were disobedient to the voice of their father; but the former sense is best; for his will to destroy them was not so much for their disregard to the reproofs of their father in which he himself was culpable, as for their breach of his laws.
x T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 87. 1. y “ideo”, Noldius, p. 395. No. 1342. “idcirco vel quapropter”, Quistorp, so Patrick.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
“ If man sins against man, God judges him; but if a man sins against Jehovah, who can interpose with entreaty for him?” In the use of and there is a paranomasia which cannot be reproduced in our language. signifies to decide or pass sentence ( Gen 48:11), then to arbitrate, to settle a dispute as arbitrator (Eze 16:52; Psa 106:30), and in the Hithpael to act as mediator, hence to entreat. And these meanings are applicable here. In the case of one man’s sin against another, God settles the dispute as arbitrator through the proper authorities; whereas, when a man sins against God, no one can interpose as arbitrator. Such a sin cannot be disposed of by intercession. But Eli’s sons did not listen to this admonition, which was designed to reform daring sinners with mild words and representation; “ for,” adds the historian, “ Jehovah was resolved to slay them.” The father’s reproof made no impression upon them, because they were already given up to the judgment of hardening. (On hardening as a divine sentence, see the discussions at Exo 4:21.)
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
(25) Sin against the Lord.This touches on the mystery of sin. There are transgressions which may again and again receive pardon, but there seems to be a transgression beyond the limits of Divine forgiveness. The pitiful Redeemer, in no obscure language, told His listeners the same awful truth when He warned them of the sin against the Holy Ghost.
They hearkened not . . . because the Lord would slay them.Here the mysteries connected with Gods foreknowledge and mans free-will are touched upon. The Lords resolution to slay them was founded on the eternal foreknowledge of their persistence in wrong-doing.
There seems to be a period in the sinners life when the Spirit of the Eternal ceases to plead; then the man is left to himself, and he feels no longer any remorse for evil done; this is spoken of in Exo. 4:21 as hardening the heart. This period in the life of Hophni and Phinehas apparently had been reached when the Lord resolved to slay them.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
25. If one man sin against another Better and literally, if man sins against man.
The judge shall judge him Hebrew, God will judge him; that is, by the properly constituted authorities, the priests, Levites, and judges. See Deu 17:8-13. Eli himself was such a judge, and intimates to his sons that in sins of man against man he might hear testimony and decide, and in rendering his judgment be partial and kind to the offender; but in sins against Jehovah he could not render judgment, but the offended Majesty of heaven would take the judgment into his own hands.
If a man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him This question was not put for the purpose of eliciting a direct answer, but to lead these wicked sons to reflection. Yet even such solemn appeals failed.
Because the Lord would slay them , was inclined to kill them. He had already given them over to judicial blindness. They had made themselves vessels of wrath fitted to destruction, and therefore God had resolved to destroy them.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Sa 2:25. If one man sin against another, the judge, &c. That is, if one neighbour do an injury to another, the business may be adjusted by the judge, who, interposing his authority, sets the matter right; but if one injure the judge himself, as was the present case, who can intercede in his behalf? Houbigant observes, that the word rendered shall judge him, would more properly and more consistently be rendered, shall be entreated; interceded with for the man. The words, because the Lord would slay them, are rendered by Dr. Waterland, wherefore the Lord would slay them; a better translation than the common one; which yet may very well be justified; as the Lord, when people become incorrigible, gives them up to their own hardness of heart, and its consequent destruction.
REFLECTIONS.The characters of these families, thus contrasted, appear more conspicuous. The negligence of Eli, the high-priest, makes Elkanah’s diligence more remarkable; and the piety of Samuel casts a double gloom upon the ungodliness of Eli’s sons.
I. Concerning Elkanah and his family, we have,
1. Their return unto Ramah, leaving Samuel behind, with Eli’s blessing upon them for the loan they had lent unto the Lord, and the effect of that blessing taking place, in five children given to Hannah in return for Samuel. Note; Nothing returns so surely with interest, as that which is lent unto the Lord, and devoted to his service.
2. Their regular and stated worship of God at Shiloh, and their care of their darling son, providing him with clothes during his noviciate at the tabernacle. Note; (1.) Though we must be in spirit always worshipping, yet regular and stated returns for prayer are carefully to be kept up. (2.) A due provision for children is a parent’s duty, and should be their delight, never grudging the expence of it.
3. The progress Samuel made under Eli’s care and inspection. Though surrounded with the bad examples of Eli’s sons, he carefully attended to Eli’s instructions, and ministered before him in any little service in which he was capable of being employed; and Eli, observing, no doubt, his extraordinary delight in the work, and reflecting on the extraordinary circumstances of his birth, took care betimes to train him up to the service of the tabernacle, and put on him a linen ephod, though not a priest, and before he was of the usual age to minister before the Lord. As he increased in stature, his understanding and gracious dispositions, like the expanding rose-bud, disclosed their sweet perfume, and attracted the regard of God and man. Note; (1.) Under careful and pious teachers, we may hope for the blossoms of early piety. (2.) God is pleased with the graces he bestows.
II. Concerning Eli and his house, we are told,
1. Their exceeding bad character. They were sons of Belial. Though born of so godly a man, and, during their youth, brought up under his prayers and instructions, yet they turned out profane and profligate. They knew not the Lord, paid him no regard, made their office a mere benefice, and, though priests, were atheistical perhaps in opinions, certainly in their practice. Note; (1.) The best of parents have often lived to see themselves in Eli’s unhappy case. Grace cannot be communicated but from God alone. (2.) It were greatly to be wished, that Eli’s sons had been the last of such priests; but there are still too many of their successors, whose profession makes their immoralities and infidelity more infamous and more criminal.
2. The particular acts of their wickedness are recorded to their everlasting shame. They were rapacious, profane, and adulterous. In view of such abominations, it cannot be wondered that the people abhorred the offerings of the Lord where such impiety was practised, and that God with a deep brand stamped their wickedness before him, to be remembered afterwards to their eternal confusion. Note; (1.) A rapacious priest is accursed of God, and abhorred of men. (2.) They who make a god of their belly, only add to their impiety by the mockery of wearing Christ’s livery. (3.) To abuse the credit of the sacred office, in order to succeed in the gratification of bestial appetite, is the highest step of human villainy and abandoned wickedness.
3. Their hardened resistance of their father’s reproof. He heard of their ill-doings: the injured, no doubt, complained to him; but he was old, and unable therefore himself to inspect the concerns of his office; and his sons were too headstrong to be restrained by him. Yet he remonstrates with them on their evil doings, expostulates on the ill-tendency of their wickedness, in leading God’s people to transgress, and warns them of the dreadful danger of it to their own souls, when, without an advocate, they should appear before God, and receive that eternal condemnation which their crimes provoked. But words signified little to them; they needed severer correction; and for Eli’s sinful indulgence of them, God will visit him when he takes vengeance on them: for, having resolved to slay them, God had given them up to the blindness and hardness of their own hearts; and therefore they hearkened not to their father, but went on in their iniquities. Note; (1.) There is not a more hopeless character, than a disobedient child. (2.) Parents have often much reason to blame their sinful lenity and indulgence, and not only are chargeable with guilt before God for withholding the rod of correction, but are made here to smart for it by their children’s undutifulness and sufferings. (3.) There is a sin unto death, for which there is no entreating: let us tremble at every approach to this unpardonable state.
III. Samuel’s character closes the narrative. His piety served to remove that disgust which Eli’s sons had given, and his behaviour the more conciliated the regard of God’s people, as it appeared more eminent and exemplary in the midst of such bad company. Note; It is some comfort, when great impiety and wickedness have crept into the church of God, that some burning and shining lights continue to be raised up in it, that we may not be as Sodom, nor become like unto Gomorrah.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
DISCOURSE: 283
THE DANGER OF NEGLECTING THE GREAT SACRIFICE
1Sa 2:25. If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him: but if a man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him?
THE consideration of an earthly tribunal is of great use to restrain the wickedness of ungodly men. But as there are innumerable offences which can neither be proved by human testimony, nor defined by human laws, it is necessary that men should be reminded of another tribunal, to which they shall be shortly summoned, and before which they shall be called to a strict account. Long before the deluge this was a topic much enforced by the preachers of religion [Note: Jude, ver. 14, 15.]; and Eli adverted to it, as well calculated to enforce his exhortations, and to dissuade his sons from their impieties. His sons were transgressors of no common stamp: they are justly reprobated as sons of Belial. Their father being advanced in years, the administration of the priestly office had devolved to them. This office they abused to the purposes of oppression and debauchery. The interposition of their father became highly necessary: as Gods vicegerent, he should have vindicated the honour of God, and the rights of his subjects. He should have interposed, not only with parental but judicial authority. He should not only have manifested his detestation of their lewdness and rapacity, but should have punished them with degradation. He however, either from a timidity and supineness incident to age, or from a shameful partiality for his own children, forbore to inflict the punishment they deserved; and contented himself with expostulations and reproofs. He said to them, Why do ye such things? for I hear of your evil doings by all this people. Nay, my sons: for it is no good report that I hear; ye make the Lords people to transgress. If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him; but if a man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him? With less hardened criminals these words might have produced a good effect: for if it be awful to be summoned before an earthly judge, how much more so to be called into the presence of God, laden with iniquities, and destitute of any advocate or intercessor!
May our minds be impressed with reverence and godly fear, while we consider the import of this admonition, and deduce from it some suitable and important observations!
The words of the text do not at first sight appear to need much explanation: but we cannot well understand the antithesis, or see the force of the interrogation, without adverting particularly to the circumstances, which occasioned the reproof. The sense is not, That, if a man violate an human law, he shall be condemned by an earthly judge; and, that if he violate the divine law, he shall be condemned by God himself: this is far short of its real import.
The sin which the sons of Eli had committed was of a peculiar nature. They, as priests, had a right to certain parts of all the sacrifices that were offered: but, instead of being contented with the parts which God had allotted them, and of burning the fat according to the divine appointment, they sent their servants to strike their flesh-hooks of three teeth into the pot or caldron where the meat was seething, and to take whatsoever the flesh-hook might bring up. If they came before the flesh was put into the caldron, they demanded it raw, together with all the fat that was upon it. If the people objected to such lawless proceedings, or reminded them that they must not forget to burn the fat, the servants were ordered to take away the meat immediately, and by force [Note: ver. 16.]. To these enormities, the young men added others of a most malignant nature: they, who, from their office, should have been ministers of justice, and patterns of all sanctity, availed themselves of their situation to seduce the women, when they came to worship at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation [Note: ver. 22.]. Thus they discouraged the people from even coming to the house of God, and caused them to abhor the offering of the Lord.
Now it should be recollected that sacrifices were the instituted means of reconciliation with God: there was no other way in which any offence, whether ceremonial or moral, could be purged, but by the offering of the appointed sacrifice before the door of the tabernacle: without shedding of blood there was to be no remission [Note: Heb 9:22.].
It should be remembered further, that these sacrifices were typical of the great sacrifice which Christ was in due time to offer upon the cross. The whole Epistle to the Hebrews was written to establish and illustrate this point. The blood of bulls and of goats could never take away sin: they had no efficacy at all, but as they typified him who was to appear in this last dispensation to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself [Note: Heb 9:25-26; Heb 10:1; Heb 10:4; Heb 10:14.].
In causing therefore the offerings of the Lord to be thus abhorred, the young men sinned in a peculiar manner against God himself: they poured contempt upon the very means which God had provided for their obtaining of pardon and reconciliation with him. Thus they rendered their situation desperate: had they only committed some heinous offence against man, a judge, intrusted with the execution of the laws, might have arbitrated between the parties: he might have punished the delinquents, and obtained satisfaction for the injured person: and, the offenders, if truly penitent, might have brought their offering to God, and thus, through the blood of their sacrifice and the intercession of the priest, have obtained the remission of their sin. But they had sinned immediately against God himself; so that there was no third person to redress the grievance or settle the dispute. Moreover they had despised the only atonement that could be offered for them: yea, in despising the typical, they had, in fact, disclaimed all trust in the real atonement. What hope then remained for them? Having provoked God, they had no person of authority sufficient to arbitrate between them: and having rejected the only Sacrifice, the only Advocate, the great High-priest, they had none to make atonement for them, they had none to intercede: they must therefore be left to their fate, and reap the bitter fruits of their iniquities. In confirmation of this, God declared that their sin should not be purged by sacrifice or offering for ever [Note: 1Sa 3:14.].
With this explanation we see at once the force and emphasis of the words before us. They were intended to express the exceeding heinousness of the sins that had been committed, and to deter the offenders from persisting in such fatal conduct. While they intimate the danger to which a violation of human laws will expose us, they insinuate the infinitely greater danger we incur by contemning the only means of forgiveness with God.
With the additional light which the New Testament reflects on this passage, we may see that we are as much interested in this admonition, as the very persons were, to whom it was first given: for, though we have not run to their excess of riot, or caused the offering of the Lord to be so abhorred, yet we have too much disregarded the sacrifice of the Son of God. If we have not openly opposed the atonement of Christ, we have been, perhaps still are, too indifferent about it. The censure therefore in the text, how severe soever it may appear, lies in full force against us. To neglect the Saviour is in a most fatal manner to sin against God: it is, at the same time, to provoke the Majesty of heaven, and to reject the only Advocate, the only Propitiation for sin. Hence the Apostle asks with such tremendous energy, How shall ye escape if ye neglect so great salvation [Note: Heb 2:3.]? Which question, both in import and expression, accords with that in our text, If a man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him?
In this application of the passage we are countenanced by a parallel passage in the Epistle to the Hebrews [Note: Heb 10:26-29.], If we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. Here the writer states the reason why an apostate from the truth has nothing to expect but wrath and fiery indignation; the reason is the same as in our text; he has turned his back on the sacrifice of Christ, and there will be no other sacrifice for sin to all eternity: there is therefore no hope of salvation for him. The Apostle then adds, He that despised Moses law, died without mercy, under two or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite to the Spirit of grace? Thus may we ask, in reference to the text, If the infraction of human laws, when substantiated by sufficient evidence, be ever punished with the loss of life, how much more shall a neglect and contempt of Christ meet with due recompence from an holy and omniscient God?
The text being thus explained, we may proceed to deduce from it some important observations.
The solemnity of the present occasion [Note: An Assize Sermon at Cambridge.] requires us to take some notice of human judicatures: we shall not however restrict our observations to them: there is a future judgment to which we must look forward; nor should we satisfy your expectations any more than our own conscience, if we did not principally advert to that. The text affords us a proper opportunity for discharging our duty in both respects.
We observe then,
I.
That the dispensing of justice by persons duly qualified and authorized, is an unspeakable blessing to a nation.
The institution of judges is a necessary part of every well-ordered government. When God called his people Israel, and formed them into a distinct nation by his servant Moses, he gave this command; Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee throughout all thy tribes; and they shall judge the people with just judgment [Note: Deu 16:18.]. When Jehoshaphat set himself to restore the political and religious welfare of his kingdom, he paid immediate attention to this point: he set judges in the land throughout all the fenced cities of Judah, city by city; and said to the judges, Take heed what ye do; for ye judge not for man, but for the Lord, who is with you in judgment [Note: 2Ch 19:5-6.]. After the Babylonish captivity also, when the Persian monarch gave commandment respecting the re-establishment of the Jews in their own land, he particularly enjoined Ezra to be mindful of this matter: Thou, Ezra, after the wisdom of thy God that is in thine hand, set magistrates and judges, which may judge all the people that are beyond the river: and whosoever will not do the law of thy God, and the law of the king, let judgment be executed speedily upon him, whether it be unto death, or to banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to imprisonment [Note: Ezr 7:25-26.]. Indeed, without such an institution, the laws themselves would be altogether vain and useless: the weak would sink under oppression; and the strong tyrannize with impunity. The bonds of society would be broken asunder; and universal anarchy would prevail. We have witnessed the destruction of all constituted authorities, and the utter annihilation of all established laws. We have beheld licentiousness stalking with the cap of liberty, and ferocious despotism, under the name of equality, spreading desolation with an undiscriminating hand [Note: At the time of the French Revolution.]. But, blessed be God, it is not thus with Britain: I pray God it never may be. The laws, with us, are respected; and they, who superintend the execution of them, are reverenced. If one man sin against another, we have judges, who are competent, and not afraid, to judge him. If existing laws are not sufficient to check the progress of conspiracy and treason, we have a legislature, that will deliberate with coolness, and enact with wisdom. If the necessary restraints be violated by presumptuous demagogues, we have magistrates, that will call the offenders to trial; juries, that will bring in their verdict with conscientious truth; and judges, that, while they declare the sentence of the law with firmness, know how to temper judgment with mercy. Yes, to their united efforts, under the care of Providence, we owe it, that faction and sedition have been disarmed of the power, would to God I might also add, the inclination, to disturb the realm.
However the opinions of many were shaken for a time by specious arguments and groundless cavils, there are but few, it is hoped, at this time, whose eyes have not been opened to discern the excellence of our constitution. Who, that has seen insulted majesty proclaiming pardon to mutiny and sedition; who that, when the contemners of that pardon were brought to trial, has seen the very judges becoming counsel for the accused; who, that has seen to what an amazing extent lenity has been carried (not from partiality or supineness, as under Elis administration, but from a love of mercy, and a desire to win the offenders to a sense of duty) who, that reflects how forbearance has been exercised, insomuch that not a single execution even of the most daring traitors took place, till lenient measures absolutely defeated their own ends; who, I say, that has seen these things, must not acknowledge the equity and mildness of our government? And who, that knows the value of such a government, would not uphold it to the utmost of his power?
While we are speaking upon this subject, it is impossible to omit the mention of one, who with unexampled fortitude has stemmed the torrent of iniquity in this country, and has made the most opulent to know, that if they will tempt the chastity of individuals, and destroy the peace of families, they shall do it at their peril. I do not hesitate to say, that every father of a family, and every lover of virtue in this kingdom, stands indebted to him, and has reason to bless God, that such integrity and power are combined in one person [Note: The name of Lord Kenyon will necessarily occur to the mind of every reader. He awarded 10,000l. damages in a case of adultery.].
There is one other point worthy to be noticed in the judicatories of this country; I mean, a freedom from political or religious prejudice. If a man be known to disapprove the measures of government, he is not the less likely on that account to obtain justice in any cause in which he may be engaged: if he dissent from the established mode of worship, he is not the less protected in the right of serving God according to his conscience: nor, if on account of superior zeal and piety, he be branded with an ignominious name, will prejudice be suffered to bias the decisions of our courts against him. Every member of the community, of whatever denomination or description, is sure to have his cause attentively heard, and impartially determined.
These things cannot but create a love to our constitution in the mind of every man, who rightly appreciates the blessings of civil and religious liberty. And I pray God that the laws of our country may ever continue to be thus respected, and to be thus dispensed.
The observation now made, has been suggested by the first part of Elis admonition. Another observation we may offer, arising from the obvious connexion which subsists between that and the latter member of the text; namely,
II.
That there are many things, not cognizable by human laws, which will be brought to trial before the Judge of quick and dead.
Mans tribunal is erected principally for judging things which particularly affect the welfare of society; and, in criminal causes, respect is had to actions rather than to thoughts, or at least to actions as the evidences of our thoughts. But at the tribunal of God, every thing which affected the divine government will be brought forward, the sins against God, as well as sins against our fellow-creatures; the sins of omission, as well as of commission; the sins of thought and desire, as well as those of purpose and of act. There is not any one action of our lives that will not then be weighed in the balance of the sanctuary; there is not a word of our lips, which will not then bear its proper stamp of piety, or transgression: there is not so much as a thought of our hearts, that will not receive its just mark of approbation or displeasure. We are expressly told, that God in that day will judge the secrets of men; that he will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and make manifest the counsels of the heart; and that he will then reward every man according to what he hath done, whether it be good or evil; to them, who by patient continuance in well-doing have sought for glory and honour and immortality, he will give eternal life: but to them that were contentious, and obeyed not the truth, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, even upon every soul of man that doeth evil. At that day, we are informed, the Judge will come in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory; and he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, even with the voice of the archangel, and the trump of God. Then shall the sea give up the dead which were in it, and death and hell deliver up the dead that were in them, and all, small and great, shall stand before God. The Ancient of days, whose garment is white as snow, and the hair of whose head is like pure wool, will sit upon his fiery throne; and while a fiery stream issues from before him, and ten thousand times ten thousand minister unto him, he will open the books [Note: Dan 7:9-10.]; the book of life [Note: Rev 20:12.], wherein the names of his people are written; the book of his remembrance [Note: Mal 3:16.], wherein the most secret imaginations of mens hearts were registered; the book of conscience too [Note: Mat 22:12.], which, however illegible now through our ignorance and partiality, will be found to correspond with his records in every particular; and lastly, the book of his law [Note: Rom 2:12.], according to which he will pass his judgment. Ah! who can reflect on the solemnities of that day, and not be filled with awe? Who amongst us can endure so strict a scrutiny? Who can abide the day of his coming? We may easily conceive the feelings of a prisoner, who, being to be tried for a capital offence, hears the trumpet announce the coming of his judge. Let us endeavour to realize the thought, and to apply it to our own case. We are sure that such a criminal would lose no time in preparing for his defence. He would engage his counsel, summon his witnesses, and employ every art in order to obtain a favourable sentence. Let us go and do likewise: our time is short; the Judge is at the door, and if we be unprepared to meet him, woe be unto us; our sentence will be awful indeed: the very terms, in which it will be expressed, are already told us; Depart, ye cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels [Note: Mat 25:41.]. In one respect indeed we differ widely from such a criminal: if he escape, it must be through want of evidence to convict him: whereas the only way for us to escape is, to confess our guilt, and plead the atonement offered for us by the Son of God.
This leads me to my last observation, namely,
III.
That a neglect of Christ will be found in that day to have been the most fatal of all offences.
Sins of any other kind, how heinous soever they may have been, yea, though they may have brought us to an ignominious end, may yet be pardoned of our God, provided we turn to him with unfeigned sorrow and contrition, and rely on the atonement which Christ has offered. The Scriptures are extremely full and strong upon this subject. They declare that all who believe, shall be justified from all things; that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin; that though our sins be as scarlet they shall be as wool, though they be red like crimson they shall be white as snow. So undoubted is this truth, and so suited to the condition of fallen man, that it has been often and well proclaimed in our very courts of justice; proclaimed, I say, to criminals condemned, at the very time of condemnation, and that too, by those very persons who pronounced the sentence of death against them. Yes, thanks be to God, there are judges, even in this degenerate age, who are not ashamed to unite the balm of Christian counsel with the severity of a penal sentence.
But let us suppose that we have neither violated the laws of man, nor, in any flagrant instances, the laws of God; shall we therefore be acquitted at Gods tribunal? Shall we need none to entreat for us, none to plead our cause in that day? May we safely neglect the sacrifice of Christ, because we have abstained from gross iniquities? Let us not deceive ourselves with any such dangerous imagination: We all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; every mouth therefore must be stopped, and all the world must become guilty before God. None can stand upon the footing of his own righteousness. Having transgressed the law, we are cursed by the law; as it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them. We must therefore all, without exception, seek deliverance in Him, who hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us. God has declared that there is salvation in no other; that there is no other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved, but the name of Jesus Christ: if we will not enter by that door, we exclude ourselves from even a possibility of obtaining mercy to all eternity.
I know it will be urged in opposition to this, that we have been free from all gross offences, and have been punctual in the observance of many civil and religious duties. Be it so: but how would such a plea sound in a court of justice? Let a criminal, accused of rebellion against an earthly monarch, plead his allegiance to the King of kings; let him say, I regarded his sacrifice, I trusted in the atonement, I sought an interest in Christ. Would his plea be valid? Would he not be told immediately, that these things he ought indeed to have done, and not have left the other undone? Thus then we answer those, who go about to establish their own righteousness instead of submitting to the righteousness of God; It was well that you abstained from gross sin, and fulfilled many duties; but you ought also to have sought redemption through the blood of Christ; you ought to have fled for refuge to the hope set before you: and because you have neglected him, you have no part or lot in his salvation. What can be plainer than our Lords own assertions, No man cometh to the Father but by me; and, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part in me? or what can be more awful than that interrogation of St. Peter, What shall the end be of them that obey not the Gospel of God? We may venture to put the question to the conscience of every considerate man; If you sin against God in neglecting and despising his dear Son, what atonement will you offer to him? If you make light of the sacrifice offered upon Calvary, where will you find another sacrifice for sin? If you disregard the mediation and intercession of Christ, where will you find another advocate? If you sin thus against God, who shall entreat for you?
Here then the subject wears a very serious and solemn aspect. We all are hastening to the judgment-seat of Christ, where we must give account of ourselves to God. There, high and low, rich and poor, judges and criminals, must all appear to receive their sentence of condemnation or acquittal; there will be no respect of persons with God: even the criminal who died by the hand of the executioner, provided that his disgraceful circumstances led him to reflection, and made him implore mercy through the blood of Jesus, shall stand a monument of redeeming grace: while his superiors in morality, yea, even the judge who condemned him, if they died in impenitence and unbelief, shall hear the sentence of condemnation pronounced against them, and be doomed to that second death in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone.
Let us then inquire diligently into the state of our souls: let us judge ourselves that we be not judged of the Lord. Let us examine what regard we have paid, and are yet daily paying, to the sacrifice of Christ; let us inquire whether He be all our salvation and all our desire? And let us remember, that if we would have him to entreat for us in that day, we must now entreat him for ourselves, desiring earnestly to be found in him, not having our own righteousness, but the righteousness of God which is by faith in him.
Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)
(25) If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him: but if a man sin against the LORD, who shall intreat for him? Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because the LORD would slay them.
What a sweet verse is this, abstracted from the family of Eli, and applied to the case of Christians in general. Who shall intreat for the sinner? I answer, Jesus; for so saith John, “If any man sin we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous, and he is the propitiation for our sins.” Precious Redeemer! thou art both our Advocate and Propitiation; our Judge and Saviour. Thou art all we stand in need of, for the transgressions of our nature. 1Jn 2:1-2 . Observe, how sin hardens the heart, in the case of Eli’s sons. The Lord had given them up to a judicial blindness. Oh! for grace to all poor sinners, to offer up continually that prayer of the Church, “From all blindness of heart, good Lord deliver us!”
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1Sa 2:25 If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him: but if a man sin against the LORD, who shall intreat for him? Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because the LORD would slay them.
Ver. 25. If one man sin against another. ] The magistrate or umpire may compose the difference in such a case, and piece them together again, if they be not implacable, and if their hearts be not bigger than their suits.
But if a man sin against the Lord,
Who shall intreat for him?
Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto the voice of their father.
Because the Lord would slay them.
a Lib. i. epist. 3.
b Amb., lib. i. De Paenit., cap. 8.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
the judge = God. Hebrew. Elohim. App-4. who. ? Figure of speech Erotesis. App-6.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
sin against: Deu 17:8-12, Deu 25:1-3
if a man: 1Sa 3:14, Num 15:30, Psa 51:4, Psa 51:16, Heb 10:26
who shall: 1Ti 2:5, Heb 7:25
hearkened: Deu 2:30, Jos 11:20, 2Ch 25:16, Pro 15:10, Joh 12:39, Joh 12:40
because: Rather, therefore, as the particle kee also signifies (see note on Psa 116:10), so Noldius, Ideo voluit Jehova eos interficere, “Therefore Jehovah purposed to destroy them.”
Reciprocal: Jdg 20:13 – would not 1Sa 19:4 – sin against 2Sa 21:3 – wherewith 2Ch 10:15 – the cause Job 9:33 – is there Pro 1:8 – hear Pro 13:1 – but Pro 29:1 – General Ecc 3:3 – time to kill Act 24:10 – a judge 1Co 8:12 – when 1Jo 5:16 – There
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Sa 2:25. If one man sin against another, &c. If only man be wronged, man can set the matter right, and reconcile the persons. If a man sin against the Lord As you have done, wilfully and presumptuously; who shall entreat for him? The offence is of so high a nature that few or none will dare to intercede for him, but will leave him to the just judgment of God. The words may be rendered, Who shall judge for him? Who shall interpose as umpire between God and him? Who shall compound that difference? None can or dare do it. And therefore he must be left to the dreadful but righteous displeasure of God. Eli reasoned well; but reasoning was not sufficient, nor any reproof he could have given in this case. It demanded a more serious interference; and he ought not to have referred their punishment unto God, when it was in his power to have punished them himself. They hearkened not, &c., because the Lord would slay them Or, as the Hebrew may be rendered, Therefore the Lord would slay them. The sense, however, according to the common translation, is Scriptural and good. They had disregarded many admonitions, which, no doubt, their father had given them; they had now hardened their hearts, and sinned away their day of grace, and therefore God had given them up to a reprobate mind, and determined to destroy them, 2Ch 25:16.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
2:25 If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him: but if a man sin against the LORD, who shall intreat for him? Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because the LORD {r} would slay them.
(r) So that to obey good admonition is God’s mercy, and to disobey them is his just judgment for sin.