Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother V
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.
So if you don't listen to your father's admonition, then the LORD can't slay you?
|
The Webster 1828 dictionary tells us that there is another sense of the word "would". This is the sense that applies here:
Quote:
|
Would has the sense of wish or pray, particularly in the phrases, would to God, would God we had died in Egypt, I would that ye knew what conflict I have; that is, I could wish such a thing, if the wish could avail. Here also there is an implied condition.
|
God strongly desired to slay Eli's sons, so He hardened their hearts so they wouldn't listen to their father's admonitions.
As you pointed out, this was during a time when God was being subtle. That's why He hardened their hearts to make sure that they would remain damned instead of instantly consuming them in a big fireball like he did to Aaron's boys. This subtlety was a new tactic for Him, so that's why God felt it necessary to add the decree that any attempt at atonement from them would not be accepted.
As any seeker struggling with finding their faith can testify, God has certainly mastered the art of subtlety these days. Back in Moses' time, miracles were obvious. People were instantly killed by columns of fire from the sky, swallowed up by the ground, or besieged by flying flaming biting serpents. These days, God limits His miracles to things about which the atheists can invent so-called "rational explanations", such as cancer going into remission or leaving a cross-shaped piece of steel in the World Trade Center rubble.
Pastor Billy-Reuben