Sermon Tone Analysis
Overall tone of the sermon
This automated analysis scores the text on the likely presence of emotional, language, and social tones. There are no right or wrong scores; this is just an indication of tones readers or listeners may pick up from the text.
A score of 0.5 or higher indicates the tone is likely present.
Emotion Tone
Anger
0.08UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.07UNLIKELY
Fear
0.08UNLIKELY
Joy
0.65LIKELY
Sadness
0.15UNLIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.6LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.15UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.93LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.82LIKELY
Extraversion
0.27UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.59LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.76LIKELY
Tone of specific sentences
Tones
Emotion
Language
Social Tendencies
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
Introduction
I think the longing of our hearts is to fill a void that nothing in this world can fill.
Not money, sex, pleasure, work, government, health, nothing.
It can only be filled by God.
It is a void that He has put in every human being.
This longing I am calling fellowship.
We sing hymns about walking with God and having fellowship with Him.
“He Lives” (377) ‘he walks with me and talks with me along lifes narrow way.’ or “in the garden’” ‘He walks with me and talks with me and tells me I am his own. .
.’ or “ive found a friend” (101) or “it is glory just to walk with Him” (324) So we sing about this fellowship that we say we have.
However, no one demonstrates this better than King Solomon.
He had it all.
He was the wealthiest, wisest, most powerful king.
He tried everything and ultimately said it comes down to fearing God and keeping His commandments.
I see this worked out in which was recorded at the dedication of his temple.
142,000 animals sacrificed and the people feasted for 2 weeks.
There was gladness and joy due to their peace with God.
What a tremendous peace offering celebration.
Now we don’t offer sacrifices of peace offerings as they did in our text, but we like them long for fellowship with God.
As we have seen before this is answering the question ‘how can a sinful, unholy people/person come before the Righteous/holy God without dying?
How can a holy God dwell in the midst of an unholy people who deserve to die?
So we will examine to see how an unholy people can fellowship with the Holy God.
I.
The Occasions for the peace offerings
There were at least three occasions for bringing a peace offering to God:
The feast of tabernacles, ,
The completion of vow, as in the Nazarite vow.
You will recall from that Paul paid for four others to complete their Nazarite vows.
That would have been to pay for the elements of the offerings to given.
The ordination of priests, ,.
II.
The types of offerings,
This is closely associated with the occasions of the offerings.
These would have been thanksgiving/confession offerings.
Wenham, in his commentary points out that the thanksgiving offering () could be presented in response to some blessing, it could also be a confession of sin or seeking deliverance offering too.Heb.
tôḏāh is usually translated “thanksgiving”; but the idea is broader than this.
It can cover the confession of sin ( referring to Achan’s sin; referring to the sin of the people in taking foreign wives.
) as well as confession of faith arising out of a man’s experience of God’s mercy.
(C.
Westermann, THWAT I, pp.
674–682.1 (Wenham, G. J. (1979).
The Book of Leviticus.
Grand Rapids, MI: Wm.
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.)
1 Wenham, G. J. (1979).
The Book of Leviticus.
Grand Rapids, MI: Wm.
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
a second type of offering was the offering of a vow, ;
; votive offering where the worshipper made a vow to God, ; freewill offering as an expression of gratitude to God.
A third type was a freewill offering as an expression of gratitude to God.
It was a praise offering.
So if you wanted to come before God to give praise for answered prayer, completion of a vow, or to confess some sin or thanksgiving to God then you would bring a peace offering.
That is why the feast of tabernacles was appropriate.
Because you were coming thanking God for providing the harvest, for providing redemption, deliverance from slavery and so on.
III.
The elements of the offering
As we see there are three kinds of animals offered, a bull, a long tailed sheep or a goat.
We also note that they could male or female and they had to be perfect, ie.
without blemish.
Although if it was a free will offering and not in fulfillment of a vow it did not have to be perfect, .
That would be because it was not offered on the altar, it was given as support to the priest making the offering.
We also see the manner or order of the offering was the same as burnt offering.
The donor would bring the animal to the door of the tent of meeting, lay his hands on the head of animal and slay it.
The priest would then take the blood and splatter it on the altar.
Now there are some differences between this offering and the other offerings.
1.has to do with the fat.
The ḥēleb, “the fat” that covers the organs and entrails, was not to be eaten but was to be burned.
The fat represented the choicest part of the offering.
The fat belonged to God and had to be offered to him in sacrifice.
The fat as I understand it is not speaking of the fat that is marbled into the meat and such.
but to the special fat as described herein which would not be normally eaten by people.
The former is called the shuman and presumably could be eaten by people.
the helev was this fat around the entrails and such.
In the sheep offering there is difference in the offering of the fat.
The goat and sheep were offered the same way with the exception of the sheep and the fat of the tail.
THe fat tail was the part of the long tailed sheep whose fat tail could weigh up to 28 lbs.
It was a delicacy in some cultures.
That might be what was happening with Eli’s sons.
The fat is an analogy of the Lord being the choicest of the offerings.
We see an example of its abuse in .
The sons wanted the fat themselves.
They showed contempt for the Lord.
Which was a clear indication of their unbelief.
They did not have fellowship with God.
the kidneys and entrails were referred to the seat of the emotions in the OT, ; ; where the word ‘heart’ is the Hebrew Kilya meaning kidneys.
In OT it refers to the mind and will.
It is possible then in the offering of the kidneys and fat to symbolize the worshippers best and deepest emotions to God as though he is giving his heart to the Lord.
Now I want to say something about the name of the offering, which probably should have been said at first.
But the title comes from the Hebrew zevah-which is a sacred meal where the donor and the priest share a portion of the meat.
The fat is burned on the altar to God.
This is the only sacrifice where the meat is shared and eaten by both.
tells us that the priest would get the right shoulder and the loin/thigh of the offering.
The Hebrew word shelamim is difficult to define precisely because the Hebrew verb sh-l-m, from which it derives, has many related yet different connotations.
The translation “sacrifice of well-being” reflects one of these meanings, based on the rendering of shalom as “well-being, wholeness.”
The preferred rendering “sacred offering of greeting” reflects, on the other hand, the particular role of this sacrifice in the Israelite cult.
In time, shelamim became the term for a general category of sacrifices and was virtually interchangeable with zevaḥ itself.
(Levine, B. A. (1989).
Leviticus (p.
14).
Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.)
You will remember in Saul is searching for mules and goes to meet Samuel for advice only to be anointed as King.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9