1 samuel 4 commentary

1 SAMUEL 4 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
1And Samuel’s word came to all Israel.
The Philistines Capture the Ark
Now the Israelites went out to fight against the
Philistines. The Israelites camped at Ebenezer,
and the Philistines at Aphek.
BARNES, "Some attach the opening words to the close of 1 Sam. 3, as the
complement of what is there said, “The Lord revealed himself to Samuel ... in Shiloh,
and the word of Samuel went forth to all Israel.” If placed at the commencement of 1
Sam. 4, and in connection with what follows, they are to be understood in the sense that
Samuel called all Israel to battle against the Philistines. (Compare 1Sa_7:5.) But this is
not the natural interpretation of the words, which seem clearly to belong to what went
before.
The mention of the Philistines connects the narrative with Judg. 13–16. Since the
Philistine servitude lasted forty years Jdg_13:1, and seems to have terminated in the
days of Samuel 1Sa_7:13-14 in about the 20th year of his judgeship 1Sa_7:2; and since it
had already begun before the birth of Samson Jdg_13:5, and Samson judged Israel for
20 years “in the days of the Philistines” Jdg_15:20, it seems to follow that the latter part
of the judgeship of Eli and the early part of that of Samuel must have been coincident
with the lifetime of Samson.
Eben-ezer - (or, the stone of help) The place was afterward so named by Samuel. See
the marginal references. “Aphek,” or the “fortress,” was probably the same as the
“Aphek” of Jos_12:18. It would be toward the western frontier of Judah, not very far
from Mizpeh of Benjamin, and near Shiloh 1Sa_4:4.
CLARKE, "The word of Samuel came to all Israel - This clause certainly
belongs to the preceding chapter, and is so placed by the Vulgate, Septuagint, Syriac, and
Arabic.
Pitched beside Eben-ezer - This name was not given to this place till more than
1

twenty years after this battle, see 1Sa_7:12; for the monument called ‫העזר‬ ‫האבן‬ haeben
haezer, the “Stone of Help,” was erected by Samuel in the place which was afterwards
from this circumstance, called Eben-ezer, when the Lord had given the Israelites a signal
victory over the Philistines. It was situated in the tribe of Judah, between Mizpeh and
Shen, and not far from the Aphek here mentioned. This is another proof that this book
was compiled after the times and transactions which it records, and probably from
memoranda which had been made by a contemporary writer.
GILL, "And the word of Samuel came to all Israel,.... Or was "known", as the
Targum, the word of prophecy by him, which related to what befell Eli and his family;
this was spread throughout the land, and everyone almost had knowledge of it, and
which began to be fulfilled in the war between Israel and the Philistines, later related; or
the doctrine, instructions, and exhortations of Samuel to the people of Israel, were by
the means of others conveyed throughout the land; and yet they went into measures
which proved fatal and ruinous to them; or the word of Samuel, which was from the
Lord, came to Israel, to stir them up to go to war with the Philistines, whereby the
punishment threatened to Eli's family would begin to have its accomplishment:
now Israel went out against the Philistines to battle; according to the word of
Samuel, or of the Lord by him; though Ben Gersom thinks they did this of themselves,
which was their sin, and did not ask counsel of the Lord, nor of Samuel his prophet; but
it seems as if the Philistines were the aggressors, and first came forth to war against
them, and they went out to meet them (a), as the word is, and defend themselves as it
became them: this was forty years after the death of Samson, and at the end of Eli's
government, who judged Israel so many years, when they had recruited themselves, and
recovered their losses they sustained by Samson; and when they perceived a new judge
was raised up among the Israelites, who was likely to be of great service to them, and to
prevent their authority over them, and therefore thought to begin with them as soon as
possible:
and pitched beside Ebenezer; a place so called by anticipation, and had its name
from an later victory obtained, when Samuel set up a stone between Mizpeh and Shen,
and called it by this name, 1Sa_7:12, it signifies a stone of help:
and the Philistines pitched in Aphek; a city in the tribe of Judah, bordering on the
Philistines; see Gill on Jos_12:18.
HENRY, "The first words of this paragraph, which relate to Samuel, that his word
came to all Israel, seem not to have any reference to the following story, as if it was by
any direction of his that the Israelites went out against the Philistines. Had they
consulted him, though but newly initiated as a prophet, his counsel might have stood
them in more stead than the presence of the ark did; but perhaps the princes of Israel
despised his youth, and would not have recourse to him as an oracle, and he did not as
yet interpose in public affairs; nor do we find any mention of his name henceforward till
2

some years after (1Sa_7:3), only his word came to all Israel, that is, people from all
parts that were piously disposed had recourse to him as a prophet and consulted him.
Perhaps it is meant of his prophecy against the house of Eli. This was generally known
and talked of, and all that were serious and observing compared the events here related,
when they came to pass, with the prophecy, and saw it accomplished in them. Here is,
I. A war entered into with the Philistines, 1Sa_4:1. It was an attempt to throw off the
yoke of their oppression, and would have succeeded better if they had first repented and
reformed, and so begun their work at the right end. It is computed that this was about
the middle of the forty years' dominion that the Philistines had over Israel (Jdg_13:1)
and soon after the death of Samson; so bishop Patrick, who thinks the slaughter he made
at his death might encourage this attempt; but Dr. Lightfoot reckons it forty years after
Samson's death, for so long Eli judged, 1Sa_4:18.
JAMISON, "1Sa_4:1-11. Israel overcome by the Philistines.
the word of Samuel came to all Israel — The character of Samuel as a prophet
was now fully established. The want of an “open vision” was supplied by him, for “none
of his words were let fall to the ground” (1Sa_3:19); and to his residence in Shiloh all the
people of Israel repaired to consult him as an oracle, who, as the medium of receiving
the divine command, or by his gift of a prophet, could inform them what was the mind of
God. It is not improbable that the rising influence of the young prophet had alarmed the
jealous fears of the Philistines. They had kept the Israelites in some degree of subjection
ever since the death of Samson and were determined, by further crushing, to prevent the
possibility of their being trained by the counsels, and under the leadership, of Samuel, to
reassert their national independence. At all events, the Philistines were the aggressors
(1Sa_4:2). But, on the other hand, the Israelites were rash and inconsiderate in rushing
to the field without obtaining the sanction of Samuel as to the war, or having consulted
him as to the subsequent measures they took.
Israel went out against the Philistines to battle — that is, to resist this new
incursion.
Eben-ezer ... Aphek — Aphek, which means “strength,” is a name applied to any
fort or fastness. There were several Apheks in Palestine; but the mention of Eben-ezer
determines this “Aphek” to be in the south, among the mountains of Judah, near the
western entrance of the pass of Beth-horon, and consequently on the borders of the
Philistine territory. The first encounter at Aphek being unsuccessful, the Israelites
determined to renew the engagement in better circumstances.
K&D, “The two clauses, “The word of Samuel came to all Israel,” and “Israel went
out,” etc., are to be logically connected together in the following sense: “At the word or
instigation of Samuel, Israel went out against the Philistines to battle.” The Philistines
were ruling over Israel at that time. This is evident, apart from our previous remarks
concerning the connection between the commencement of this book and the close of the
book of Judges, from the simple fact that the land of Israel was the scene of the war, and
that nothing is said about an invasion on the part of the Philistines. The Israelites
encamped at Ebenezer, and the Philistines were encamped at Aphek. The name
Ebenezer (“the stone of help”) was not given to the place so designated till a later period,
when Samuel set up a memorial stone there to commemorate a victory that was gained
3

over the Philistines upon the same chosen battle-field after the lapse of twenty years
(1Sa_7:12). According to this passage, the stone was set up between Mizpeh and Shen.
The former was not the Mizpeh in the lowlands of Judah (Jos_15:38), but the Mizpeh of
Benjamin (Jos_18:26), i.e., according to Robinson, the present Neby Samwil, two hours
to the north-west of Jerusalem, and half an hour to the south of Gibeon (see at Jos_
18:26). The situation of Aphek has not been discovered. It cannot have been far from
Mizpeh and Ebenezer, however, and was probably the same place as the Canaanitish
capital mentioned in Jos_12:18, and is certainly different from the Aphekah upon the
mountains of Judah (Jos_15:53); for this was on the south or south-west of Jerusalem,
since, according to the book of Joshua, it belonged to the towns that were situated in the
district of Gibeon.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 4:1. The word of Samuel came to all Israel — The revelation
of God’s mind and will, which had been very rare among them in former days, (1
Samuel 3:1,) now became frequent and plentiful. For as Samuel himself was ready
to instruct every one that came to him, so he instituted schools or colleges of
prophets, (as we read in the following parts of this book,) which, in time, were
settled in divers parts of the country, for the better preserving and spreading the
knowledge of God among the people, 1 Samuel 10:5; 1 Samuel 19:18-20. Israel went
out against the Philistines — Some have thought they did this at the word of
Samuel, and that he was commanded by God to direct them to go, in order that they
might be humbled and punished for their sins, and so be prepared for deliverance.
But we are not told that they went by Samuel’s direction, and it is more likely that
they were induced to take this step by the death of the lords of the Philistines, and
the great slaughter which Samson had made of them at his death, 16:27; 16:30. Or,
perhaps the Philistines, having recruited themselves from that loss, and wishing to
be revenged of the Israelites, had made an inroad into their country, which they
might the rather be induced to do at this time, in consequence of receiving
intelligence that an eminent prophet had arisen in Israel, by whom they were likely
to be united and assisted, and so to be rendered more formidable, unless they were
crushed in the very beginning of their hopes and efforts.
COFFMAN, "THE ARK OF THE COVENANT WAS CAPTURED BY THE
PHILISTINES
"And the word of Samuel came to all Israel" (1 Samuel 4:1a). This statement
actually belongs to the preceding chapter where it appears in a number of ancient
versions.[1] We believe that C. F. Keil was mistaken in his interpretation that these
words were a summons by Samuel for all Israel to go to war against the Philistines.
God's true prophet would not have led Israel into such a disastrous defeat.
4

THE PRELIMINARY BATTLE AT APHEK AND EBENEZER
"Now Israel went out to battle against the Philistines; they encamped at Ebenezer,
and the Philistines encamped at Aphek. The Philistines drew up in line against
Israel, and when the battle spread, Israel was defeated by the Philistines, who slew
about four thousand men on the field of battle. And when the troops came to the
camp, the elders of Israel said, "Why has the Lord put us to rout today before the
Philistines? Let us bring the ark of the covenant of the Lord here from Shiloh, that
he may come among us and save us from the power of our enemies." So the people
sent to Shiloh, and brought from there the ark of the covenant of the Lord of hosts,
who is enthroned on the cherubim; and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas,
were there with the ark of the covenant of God."
"Ebenezer ... Aphek" (1 Samuel 4:1). There were a number of Apheks in Palestine,
but the mention of nearby Ebenezer indicates that this one was in the south near the
entrance of Beth-horon near the Philistine border.[2] The mention of "field of
battle" (1 Samuel 4:2) appears to indicate that the skirmish was on relatively level
ground, thus enabling the Philistines to use their chariots of iron to their great
advantage.
This conflict with the Philistines was no new thing at all; it had been going on for
centuries. For a brief history of the Philistines, we refer to my dissertation on this
subject in the Book of Judges.
"The Philistines slew about four thousand men" (1 Samuel 4:2). We reject the
fulminations of critics charging that the figures concerning casualties in Samuel are
"grossly exaggerated." If the critics know what the casualties actually were, why do
they never tell us what they were?
"The ark of the covenant of the Lord" (1 Samuel 4:3). This, like countless other
instances of the same phenomenon, indicates a complete familiarity on the part of
the elders of Israel with the appearance and utility of the ark of the covenant as
revealed in the Pentateuch. The cherubim were symbolical representations of
5

supernatural creatures adorning the top of the mercy seat located as a covering for
the ark of the covenant; and the conception that God was "enthroned above the
cherubim" was derived from the Mosaic revelation that the Presence of God
Himself was associated with the ark of the covenant. The ark of the covenant here is
exactly the same as "the ark of God "mentioned in 1 Samuel 3:3.
The notion advanced by the elders of Israel that the presence of the ark of the
covenant in their midst would assure them of victory could not possibly have been
derived from any other source than the earlier Book of Moses (the Pentateuch) and
that of Joshua. Their fatal mistake in this was that God was leading Israel in those
earlier victories, but, in this case, they were not following any divine commandment.
They had consulted no prophet. They merely decided to utilize the ark of the
covenant as a talisman or fetish in exactly the same superstitious manner that the
pagans used similar devices supposed to represent their pagan deities. It is no
wonder that it proved to be a futile maneuver.
"So the people brought ... the ark of the covenant; and the two sons of Eli, Hophni
and Phinehas, were there with the ark of the covenant of God" (1 Samuel 4:4)! The
exclamation point here is our own. The passage certainly deserves it. There could
not possibly have been any more incongruous and contradictory elements than: (1)
the sacred ark of the covenant and (2) the scandalous reprobate sons of Eli serving
there as its custodians. There could not have been anything accidental about the
manner in which the inspired author placed these two OPPOSITE elements in such
an eloquent juxtaposition.
COKE, "1 Samuel 4:1. Now Israel went out, &c.— Probably the Israelites were
encouraged to this undertaking, by the confusion into which the Philistines must
have been thrown by the slaughter of their great men which Samson made at his
death. The name Ebenezer was not given to this place till some time after; ch. 1
Samuel 7:12 but it was so called at the time that the historian wrote this book.
ELLICOTT, " (1) And the word of Samuel.—To which portion of the narrative
does this statement belong? Is it part of that account of the Lord’s dealings with
Samuel which closed the preceding chapter? Does it close that brief narrative which
tells of the Divine voice which called to, and the vision seen by, the young chosen
servant of the Highest, with a note simply relating how the word of the boy-prophet
was received through the varied tribes of the people? Or does it tell us that at
Samuel’s word—that is, acting under his advice—Israel commenced this new
6

disastrous war with the Philistines? By adopting the first supposition, which
understands the words as a general statement respecting Samuel’s influence in
Israel, the grave difficulty of supposing that Samuel was mistaken in his first advice
to the people is, of course, removed; but then we have to explain the separation of
this clause from the preceding section in chapter 3, to which it would appear so
naturally to belong; we have also to account for the exceeding abruptness with
which the announcement of the war with the Philistines follows the clause respecting
the “word of Samuel.” The Speaker’s Commentary attempts to solve the problem by
suggesting as “the cause of the abruptness” that the account of the battle probably is
extracted from some other book in which it came in naturally and consecutively,
and that it was here introduced for the sake of exhibiting the fulfilment of Samuel’s
prophecy concerning Eli’s family. Evidently, however, the Hebrew revisers of
Samuel did not so understand the clause. They have placed the notice of Samuel’s
words coming to all Israel as introducing the narrative of the battle.
The compiler of the book, in his relation of the young prophet’s error, touches upon
an important feature of his great life. Anarchy and confusion had long prevailed
throughout the tribes, and none of the hero Judges who had as yet been raised to
power had succeeded in restoring the stern, rigid form of theocracy which had made
the Israel of Moses and Joshua so great and powerful. The high qualities which in
his prime had, no doubt, raised Eli to the first place in the nation, in his old age
were almost totally obscured by a weak affection for his unworthy sons. A terrible
picture of the corruption of the priesthood is presented to us during the last period
of Eli’s reign. We can well imagine what the ordinary life of many among the
people, with such an example from their religious guides and temporal governors,
must have been. Individual instances of piety and loyalty to the God of their fathers,
such as we see-in the house of Elkanah, even though such instances were not
unfrequent of themselves, would have been totally insufficient to preserve the nation
from the decay which always follows impiety and corruption. In this period of moral
degradation the Philistines, part of the original inhabitants of the land, a warlike
and enterprising race, taking advantage of the internal jealousies and the
weaknesses of Israel, made themselves supreme in many portions of the land,
treating the former conquerors often with harshness, and even with contempt.
Samuel grew up to manhood in the midst of this state of things. He was conscious
that the invisible King, forgotten by so many of the nation, had chosen him to be the
restorer of the chosen people. The boy-prophet, as he passed out of childhood into
7

manhood, does not appear at first to have recognised the depth of moral
degradation into which Israel had sunk, or to have seen that it was utterly hopeless
to attempt to free the people from the yoke of their Philistine foes until something
like a pure national religion was restored. Samuel and the nobler spirits in Israel,
who thirsted to restore their nation to freedom and to purity, needed a sharp and
bitter experience before they could successfully attempt the deliverance of the
people; so the first call to arms resulted in utter disaster, and the defeat at Aphek—
the result, we believe, of the summons of Samuel—was the prelude to the crushing
blow to the pride of Israel which soon after deprived them of their leaders, their
choicest warriors, and, above all, of their loved and cherished “Ark of the
Covenant,” the earthly throne of their unseen King, the symbol of His ever-presence
in their midst.
And pitched beside Eben-ezer.—“The stones of help.” The name was not given to
the place until later, when Samuel set up a stone to commemorate a victory he
gained, some twenty years after, over the Philistines.
In Aphek.—With the article, “the fortress.” Perhaps the same place as the old
Canaauitish royal city Aphek.
HAWKER, "This Chapter folds within its bosom heavy tidings for Israel in general,
and Eli's house in particular. In a battle between the Philistines and Israel, the
Israelites presumptuously, and without taking counsel of the Lord, bring the ark of
God into the camp. The Philistines are again conquerors; they take the ark of God:
the two sons of Eli, according to the Lord's declaration, are both slain. Tidings
coming to Eli of those events, the old man falls from his seat, and dies; and his
daughter-in-law, Phinehas's wife, in the premature labor of child-bed, dies also.
Such are the woeful contents of this chapter.
1 Samuel 4:1
(1) ¶ And the word of Samuel came to all Israel. Now Israel went out against the
Philistines to battle, and pitched beside Ebenezer: and the Philistines pitched in
Aphek.
By the word of Samuel coming to all Israel, is meant, no doubt, to show that the
Lord had commissioned him, as his servant, that whether the people would hear, or
8

whether they would forbear, they should know that there was a prophet of the Lord
among them. Ezekiel 2:5.
CONSTABLE, "Verse 1
II. THE HISTORY OF THE ARK OF THE COVENANT 4:1-7:1
Many serious students of 1 Samuel have noted the writer's emphasis on the ark of
the covenant that begins here in the text. Critical scholars have long argued that 1
Samuel 4:1 b to 1 Samuel 7:1 and 2 Samuel 6 are the only remaining fragments of
an older and longer ark narrative, which was a source document for the writer here.
Of the 61 references to the ark in 1 and 2 Samuel, 36 appear in 1 Samuel 4:1 b to 1
Samuel 7:2. More recently some scholars have come to believe that the old ark
narratives were somewhat shorter. Conservative scholars generally believe that the
ark narratives were not necessarily independent documents but may simply reflect
the writer's particular emphasis on the ark here. [Note: For a discussion of this
subject, including a bibliography of books and articles dealing with it, see
Youngblood, pp. 593-94.] One writer believed that their purpose was to explain
Israel's demand for a king, as well as the reasons for the end of Eli's branch of the
Aaronic family. [Note: Merrill, "1 Samuel," p. 208.]
Verses 1-11
1. The battle of Aphek 4:1-11
The Philistines, as we have already seen in Judges, were Israel's primary enemy to
the west at this time. Samson, too, fought the Philistines (Judges 13-16). [Note: For a
good, brief history of the Philistines, see Edward Hindson, The Philistines and the
Old Testament.] There are about 150 references to the Philistines in 1 and 2 Samuel.
They originally migrated from Greece primarily by way of Crete (Caphtor, cf.
Genesis 10:14; Jeremiah 47:4; Amos 9:7). Their major influx into Canaan occurred
about 1200 B.C., about 100 years before the events recorded in this chapter.
9

However there were some Philistines in Canaan as early as Abraham's day (Genesis
21:32; et al.). [Note: For further study, see Trude Dothan, The Philistines and Their
Material Culture, especially pp. 13-16, 21-24, and 289-96.]
The town of Aphek (cf. 1 Samuel 29:1; New Testament Antipatris, Acts 23:31) stood
on the border between Philistine and Israelite territory. It was about 11 miles east
and a little north of Joppa (and modern Tel Aviv). Archaeologists have not yet
located Ebenezer, but it was obviously close to Aphek and on Israel's side of the
border. It may have been the modern Izbet Sarteh about two miles east of Aphek on
the road to Shiloh. [Note: Moshe Kochavi and Aaron Demsky, "An Israelite Village
from the Days of the Judges," Biblical Archaeology Review 4:3 (1978):19-21.]
In Israel's first encounter with the Philistines in 1 Samuel, the enemy slew 4,000
Israelite soldiers (1 Samuel 4:2), and in the second, 30,000 Israelites fell (1 Samuel
4:10). Between these two encounters the Israelites sent to Shiloh for the ark. The ark
had always been the place where God dwelt in a special way among the Israelites. It
contained the tablets of the Decalogue and the mercy seat where the high priest
atoned for the sins of the nation. It was for these reasons a symbol of God and His
presence. During the long period of the judges the Israelites as a whole had adopted
an increasingly pagan attitude toward Yahweh. They felt that they could satisfy
Him with simply formal worship and that they could secure His help with offerings
rather than humility. They were treating the ark the same way they treated God;
they believed the ark's presence among them in battle would ensure victory.
"We eventually all learn what Israel discovered in battle against the Philistines.
Having the paraphernalia of God and having God are not the same." [Note:
Kenneth L. Chafin, 1, 2 Samuel, p. 54.]
The paraphernalia that modern believers sometimes rely on in place of God include
a crucifix, a picture of Jesus, or a family Bible positioned conspicuously in the home
but seldom read. Others base their hope of spiritual success on a spiritually strong
spouse, regular church attendance, or even the daily reading of the Bible. These
things, as good as they may be, are no substitute for a vital personal relationship
with God.
10

Perhaps the elders of Israel remembered that in Joshua's conquest of Jericho, the
ark played a very important and visible part in the victory (Joshua 6:2-20).
Nevertheless, back then the people trusted in Yahweh, not in the ark as a talisman
(good luck charm). The custom of taking idols into battle so their gods would deliver
them was common among ancient warriors (cf. 2 Samuel 5:21; 1 Chronicles 14:12).
Obviously the Israelites were wrong in thinking that the presence of the ark would
guarantee success.
"The offenses against the ark as pledge of Yahweh's presence appear to be mainly
of two kinds: (1) a misplaced reliance on the ark, and (2) an irreverent disregard for
the ark." [Note: Marten H. Woudstra, The Ark of the Covenant from the Conquest
to Kingship, p. 55.]
The Hebrew word eleph, translated thousand (1 Samuel 4:2), can also mean military
unit. Military units were of varying sizes but considerably smaller than 1,000
soldiers. [Note: For more information concerning the problem of large numbers in
the Old Testament, see R. E. D. Clark, "The Large Numbers of the Old Testament,"
Journal of Transactions of the Victoria Institute 87 (1955):82-92; and J. W.
Wenham, "Large Numbers in the Old Testament," Tyndale Bulletin 18
(1967):19-53.]
Ancient Near Eastern artists sometimes pictured a king sitting on a throne
supported on either side by a cherub, which the artist represented as a winged lion
(sphinx) with a human head. [Note: W. F. Albright, "What Were the Cherubim?"
Biblical Archaeologist 1:1 (1938):1-3.] This may have been the image of the Lord of
hosts (armies) "who sits above the cherubim" that the writer had in mind here (1
Samuel 4:4).
The fact that the people shouted loudly when the ark arrived at Ebenezer from
Shiloh (1 Samuel 4:5) may be another indication that they were hoping to duplicate
the victory at Jericho (cf. Joshua 6:20). Likewise the response of the Philistines
when they heard the cry recalls Rahab's revelation of how the Canaanites feared
Yahweh (Joshua 2:9-11). These allusions to the victory at Jericho contrast the
11

Israelites' present attitude toward God with what it had been at that earlier battle.
The fact that the Israelites suffered a devastating slaughter (Heb. makkah, 1 Samuel
4:10), many times worse than their earlier recent defeat (1 Samuel 4:2), proved that
victory did not come from the ark but from the Lord. Defeat was due to sin in the
camp, including Hophni and Phinehas' sin (cf. 1 Samuel 2:25). Israel had suffered
defeat at Ai about 300 years earlier for the same reason: sin among the people
(Joshua 7:11). Trying to duplicate previous spiritual victories by going through the
same procedures is no substitute for getting right with God (cf. Judges 16:20;
Matthew 23:25).
God did not record the destruction of the tabernacle at Shiloh, but some writers
assume the Philistines razed it after they captured the ark. [Note: E.g., Joyce
Baldwin, 1 & 2 Samuel, p. 71; and Charles Pfeiffer and Howard Vos, The Wycliffe
Historical Geography of Bible Lands, p. 143.] The town probably did suffer
destruction then (cf. Jeremiah 7:12; Jeremiah 7:14; Jeremiah 26:6). [Note: See John
Bright, A History of Israel, p. 165.] However, the writer of Chronicles mentioned
that the tabernacle still stood in David's day (1 Chronicles 21:29) and when Solomon
began to reign (2 Chronicles 1:3). The writer of Samuel showed less interest in the
sanctuary structure than in the ark. The Philistines may have destroyed the town of
Shiloh, but it "revived sufficiently to produce a few worthy citizens in later
generations (cf. 1 Kings 11:29; Jeremiah 41:5)." [Note: Gordon, p. 96.]
A. The Capture of the Ark 4:1-22
A new subject comes to the forefront in this section and continues to be a significant
motif throughout the rest of Samuel. It is the ark of the covenant. The writer drew
attention to the ark in this chapter by mentioning it seven times, including a
notation at the end of each text section (1 Samuel 4:4; 1 Samuel 4:11; 1 Samuel
4:17-19; 1 Samuel 4:21-22). Following the reference to Samuel the prophet in 1
Samuel 4:1, the writer did not mention him again until 1 Samuel 7:3.
"The purpose of the story in 1 Samuel 4-6 of the ark's imprisonment in Philistia and
its travels to different Philistine cities, as well as to Beth-Shemesh, is to give an
historical background for the Philistines' rule over the whole country prior to the
12

emergence of the Israelite state which could still accentuate Yahweh's supremacy as
an unconquerable deity. The story explains how Yahweh finally became superior to
his captors." [Note: G. W. Ahlstrom, "The Travels of the Ark: A Religio-Political
Composition," Journal of Near Eastern Studies 43 (1984):143. See also Antony F.
Campbell, "Yahweh and the Ark: A Case Study in Narrative," Journal of Biblical
Literature 98:1 (1979):31-43.]
The major historical element of continuity in this section is the fate of Eli's sons (1
Samuel 4:9-11). The theological theme of fertility continues to be the primary
unifying factor in the narrative.
LANGE, "SAMUEL’S WORK AS PROPHET, PRIEST AND JUDGE
1Sam. 4:1b— 7
FIRST SECTION
Infliction of the Punishment prophesied by Samuel on the House of Eli and on all
Israel in the unfortunate Battle with the Philistines
1 Samuel 4:1 to 1 Samuel 7:1
I. Israel’s double defeat and loss of the Ark. 1 Samuel 4:1-11
1Now[FN1] [And] Israel went out against the Philistines to battle, and pitched
beside 2 Ebenezer[FN2]; and the Philistines pitched in Aphek. And the Philistines
put themselves in array against Israel, and when [om. when] they joined
battle[FN3], [ins. and] Israel was smitten before the Philistines, and they slew of the
army in the field 3 about four thousand men. And when the people were come [And
the people came] into the camp, [ins. and] the elders of Israel said, Wherefore hath
the Lord [Jehovah] smitten us to-day before the Philistines? Let us [We will] fetch
the ark of the covenant[FN4]of the Lord [Jehovah] [ins. to us] out of [from] Shiloh
unto us [om. unto us], that, when it cometh [and it shall come] among us [into our
13

midst] 4it may [om. it may, ins. and] save us out of the hand of our enemies. So
[And] the people sent to Shiloh that they might bring [and brought] from [om. from]
thence the ark of the covenant of the Lord [Jehovah] of hosts, which dwelleth
between the cherubims [who sitteth upon the cherubim[FN5]]; and the two sons of
Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were there[FN6] with the ark of the covenant of God.
5And [ins. it came to pass], when the ark of the covenant of the Lord [Jehovah]
came into the camp, all Israel shouted with a great shout, so that the earth rang 6
again[FN7]. And when [om. when] the Philistines heard the noise of the shout [ins.
and] they said, What meaneth the noise of this great shout in the camp of the
Hebrews? And they understood that the ark of the Lord [Jehovah] was come into 7
the camp. And the Philistines were afraid, for they said, God[FN8] is come into the
camp. And they said, Woe unto us ! for there hath not been such a thing heretofore
8 Woe unto us! who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty gods? these are
the gods that smote the Egyptians with all the plagues [every sort of 9 plague] in the
wilderness[FN9]? Be strong, and quit yourselves like men, O ye Philistines, that ye
be not servants unto the Hebrews, as they have been to you; quit 10 yourselves like
men and fight. And the Philistines fought, and Israel was smitten, and they fled
every man to his tent [tents[FN10]]; and there was a very great slaughter [the
slaughter was very great], for [and] there fell of Israel thirty thousand footmen 11
And the ark of God was taken, and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were
slain [the two sons of Eli perished, Hophni and Phinehas.]
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1 Samuel 4:1. Israel’s march to battle against the Philistines does not stand in
pragmatical connection with the preceding words ‘ and the word of Samuel came to
all Israel,’ as if this latter meant a summons to war with the Philistines (as is held by
most of the older expositors, and, among the later, by Keil and O. v. Gerlach.)
Rather these words conclude and sum up the description of the origin and
commencement of the prophet’s work and of his announcement of the word of the
Lord. We are now introduced immediately to the scene of the history, on which
Samuel will henceforth appear as the Lord’s instrument, a position he has reached
by the call in 1 Samuel 3:1 to 1 Samuel 4:1 a. The narrative sets us straightway into
the midst of Israel’s conflict with the Philistines. That the latter were now already in
the land is assumed in the narrative, since not only is nothing said of an incursion by
14

them, but the expression “ the Israelites went out against the Philistines” in
connection with the succeeding statement of the place of encampment points to the
fact that the Philistines had already possessed themselves of the land.[FN11] In
support of the view that Samuel summoned the Israelites to war Clericus remarks
that he did it in God’s name, that they might be punished by a defeat; but this is
inconsistent with the divine justice. The pressure of the Philistine yoke, under which
Israel groaned, was already a punishment from God. If this defeat also is so
regarded, it can be only on the supposition that the Israelites hazarded this battle
not by God’s will, and therefore without a summons by Samuel. The name of the
Israelitish camp, Ebenezer, is here given by anticipation, its origin being related in 1
Samuel 7:12, on the occasion of the victory of the Israelites over the Philistines,
twenty years after this defeat. According to 1 Samuel 7:12 it was near Mizpeh in
Benjamin, Joshua 18:26; from which we must distinguish the Mizpeh in the lowland
of Judah, Joshua 15:38. Aphek cannot have been far from this, and is therefore
“perhaps the same place with the Canaanitish royal city Aphek ( Joshua 12:18), and
decidedly a different place from the Aphekah in the hill-country of Judah ( Joshua
15:53); for the latter lay south or southeast of Jerusalem, since, according to Josh.
loc. cit, it was one of the cities which lay in the neighborhood of Gibeon.”[FN12]
(Keil)—In 1 Samuel 4:2 an orderly battle-array on both sides is described. The ‫טּשׁ‬ ִ‫ַתּ‬‫ו‬
does not describe the spreading of the tumult of battle (as is clear from the following
statement that the Israelites were beaten in the line of battle, and thence made an
orderly retreat to their camp), but the sudden mutual assault of the opposing lines
(Vulg.: inito proelio). It is said: “Israel was smitten before the Philistines,” with
reference to the local relation and the victorious superiority of the
Philistines, but at the same time in respect of God ’s punishing hand which
therein showed itself, as is expressly declared in In 1 Samuel 4:3.[FN13] The
Israelites lost in the battle—“in the field,” that Isaiah, in the plain, about4000 men.
PETT, " The Ark As The Focal Point Of The Kingship Of YHWH (4:1b-7:14).
The emphasis in this subsection is on the Kingship of YHWH as revealed by
the Ark which is the symbol of His Kingship. Because of His people ’s
disobedience and sinfulness as revealed through their priesthood YHWH
refuses to act to deliver Israel, and allows the Ark to be taken. But when the
Ark is brought to Ashdod the idol Dagon falls before YHWH and is smashed
15

to pieces. Thus even in Ashdod YHWH is revealed as King. Then through
plague, and a multiplying of vermin, YHWH brings His judgment on them
because of the disrespect that they have shown to the Ark, so that in the end
the Philistines recognise that they must return it to Israel along with suitable
homage in the form of Gifts.
But those who receive it in Israel also treat it with disrespect, even though
they are priests, demonstrating that their hearts are not right towards YHWH,
and they too are therefore smitten and punished, and the Ark is then placed
in a household where it is respected and honoured, and where it will remain
for many years.
The King being therefore once again among His people they learn, after a
twenty-year period of mourning during which He is silent, that if they will
turn from their idols and seek Him, He will deliver them from the Philistines.
And, as a result of the prayers of His prophet Samuel, the Philistines are then
driven from the land.
We are not to see the Ark as forgotten. It is its very presence in Israel that
evidences the fact that YHWH has not finally deserted His people, and the
writer intends us to see its presence as indicating that YHWH is still there as
Israel’s King, overseeing their future both for good and bad.
Analysis.
16

a The Philistines defeat Israel and capture the Ark of God (1 Samuel 4:1-22).
b The Ark of God is taken to Ashdod and the idol Dagon falls before YHWH
and is smashed in pieces (1 Samuel 5:1-5).
c The Ark of God brings misery and plague on the Philistines who disrespect
it (1 Samuel 5:6-12).
d The Ark of God is returned to Israel with reparations (1 Samuel 6:1-16).
c The Ark of God brings misery on the Israelites who disrespect it (1 Samuel
6:17 to 1 Samuel 7:2).
b The Ark of God is suitably re-established in Israel and they are promised
that if they return to YHWH and put away their idolatry they will be
delivered from the Philistines (1 Samuel 7:3-4).
a The Ark having been restored, Israel defeat the Philistines through the
prayers of Samuel (1 Samuel 7:5-14).
Note that in ‘a’ the Philistines defeat Israel and the Ark of God is defiled,
while in the parallel the Ark of God is re-established and Israel defeat the
Philistines. In ‘b’ the Ark is taken to Ashdod and the idol Dagon falls before
17

it and is smashed in pieces, and in the parallel, on the restoration of the Ark
Israel are called on to denounce their idols. In ‘c’ the Ark bring misery on
the Philistines who disrespect it and in the parallel it brings misery on the
people of Israel who disrespect it. In ‘d’ the Ark of God returns in triumph to
Israel, being duly honoured by the Philistines.
Chapter 4.
There can be little doubt that in this chapter we are being brought back to a
period before Samuel’s full influence began to be felt. Eli was now even
more infirm, and his sons were no doubt in full command. Samuel as a youth
was still serving faithfully in the Tabernacle. Israel was now once again
experiencing powerful pressure from the Philistine overlords who were
wanting to carve out an empire for themselves. The Philistines had seemingly
got over their losses brought about by Samson’s martyrdom. And Israel had
no one to look to but two decadent priests.
The Battle of Aphek: The Philistines Defeat Israel And Capture the Ark of
God (1 Samuel 4:1-22).
Not long after God had spoken to the young Samuel the Israelites rose
against the dominance of their Philistine masters in order to cast off their
yoke. This may have occurred around the time of the death of Samson, when
the Philistines would be in some disarray at the loss of many of their leaders,
an event which may well have stirred Israel to think that it could free itself.
It is noteworthy that they did not consult the young Samuel. His reputation
18

was not yet established. Nor did they seek to YHWH. They were acting on
their own initiative. Whatever their outward profession they were not in
submission to the Kingship of YHWH.
The call to the tribes would go out from the central sanctuary at Shiloh, and
the consequence was that Israel gathered an army in order to gain their
freedom from having to submit to the Philistines and pay tribute. But Israel
had no experienced military leader and were mainly farmers gathered
together to defend their lands, and worst of all at this stage, they had no one
to guide them in their decisions, for the young Samuel was still developing,
and Eli’s sons ruled in the Tabernacle. The Philistines on the other hand
were an experienced military aristocracy who had arrived from Crete and
from the Aegean a hundred or so years before and had settled in the Coastal
Plain and they were accompanied by Canaanite farmers over whom they
ruled and whom they had conscripted to service, the Canaanites probably
hoping for a share in great booty.
It will be noted that there was no preparation of heart on the part of Israel,
no seeking to YHWH. Their priests were not the kind who genuinely sought
YHWH’s guidance about anything. They simply had a vague hope that YHWH
would help them, and a superstitious trust in the Ark.
The chapter divides into two parts, the first part describes the actual battle
itself and the bringing into service of the Ark, followed by its capture, the
second part describes the after effects on Israel.
PULPIT, "1 Samuel 4:1
19

And the word of Samuel... all Israel. This clause is rightly connected with the
foregoing verse of the previous chapter in the Syriac and Vulgate. Attached
to the fourth chapter, it gives a wrong sense, namely, that Samuel gave the
command for the assembling of all Israel for battle with the Philistines. This
is so plainly erroneous that the A.V. dissents from it by translating the and in
the next clause by now. Joined to the previous chapter, it gives the true
meaning. Because Samuel spake by the word of Jehovah, therefore his word
came to all Israel, that is, it was a binding and authoritative command
throughout the whole land; or, in other words, when Samuel was
acknowledged to be Jehovah's prophet he also became the virtual judge of
Israel, though probably he did not act with full authority until after Eli's
death.
DEFEAT OF ISRAEL AND CAPTURE OF THE ARK (1 Samuel 4:1-11).
Now Israel—rather. And Israel—went out against the Philistines. During the
declining years of Eli, the yoke of the Philistines, which apparently had been shaken
off in his manhood, began once again to press heavily upon the neck of Israel. But
Israel was still strong enough to make valiant resistance, provoked apparently by
the Philistines invading the land, as we find that they had pitched, i.e. encamped, in
Aphok. As Aphek means a fortress, many places bear the name; but the position of
the Philistine camp is fixed by its being near both to Eben-ezer and to Mizpah, and
probably, therefore, it was the Aphek in Judah (Joshua 12:18). Eben-ezer, the stone
of help, had not as yet received this name (see 1 Samuel 7:12); and apparently it was
not a town, but a monument set up m an open plain fit for the purposes of war, and
which up to this time had. no specific appellation.
20

2 The Philistines deployed their forces to meet
Israel, and as the battle spread, Israel was
defeated by the Philistines, who killed about
four thousand of them on the battlefield.
CLARKE, "Put themselves in array - There is no doubt that both the Philistines and
Israelites had what might be called the art of war, according to which they marshalled
their troops in the field, constructed their camps, and conducted their retreats, sieges,
etc.; but we know not the principles on which they acted.
They slew of the army in the field about four thousand men - This must have been
a severe conflict, as four thousand were left dead on the field of battle. The contest
also must have lasted some considerable time, as these were all slain hand to hand;
swords and spears being in all probability the only weapons then used.
GILL, "And the Philistines put themselves in array against Israel ,.... Prepared for
battle, and put themselves in a posture for it; formed themselves in a line of battle,
and so invited and challenged the Israelites to fight them:
and when they joined battle; engaged with each other, the Israelites doing the same,
putting themselves in a proper form and posture for fighting; or "the battle was
spread", or "spread itself" (b); that is, as the Targum, they that made war were spread;
the soldiers were placed in order for battle, to the right and left, which took up on
both sides a large space; though Abarbinel understands this in a very different sense,
and takes the word to have the same signification as in Psa_78:60, where it has the
sense of forsaking; and so here the Israelites forsook the battle, and fled, which
brought on their destruction, flight being, as the Jews say (c), the beginning of fall or
21

ruin, as it follows:
Israel was smitten before the Philistines ; they had the worst of it and were beaten:
and they slew of the army in the field about four thousand men ; so many fell upon
the spot, in the field.
HENRY, "And the Philistines put themselves in array against Israel ,.... Prepared for
battle, and put themselves in a posture for it; formed themselves in a line of battle,
and so invited and challenged the Israelites to fight them:
and when they joined battle; engaged with each other, the Israelites doing the same,
putting themselves in a proper form and posture for fighting; or "the battle was
spread", or "spread itself" (b); that is, as the Targum, they that made war were spread;
the soldiers were placed in order for battle, to the right and left, which took up on
both sides a large space; though Abarbinel understands this in a very different sense,
and takes the word to have the same signification as in Psa_78:60, where it has the
sense of forsaking; and so here the Israelites forsook the battle, and fled, which
brought on their destruction, flight being, as the Jews say (c), the beginning of fall or
ruin, as it follows:
Israel was smitten before the Philistines ; they had the worst of it and were beaten:
and they slew of the army in the field about four thousand men ; so many fell upon
the spot, in the field.
HAWKER, "(2) And the Philistines put themselves in array against Israel: and
when they joined battle, Israel was smitten before the Philistines: and they
slew of the army in the field about four thousand men.
This spot of Ebenezer, where the Philistines pitched their army, was made
memorable in the after battles of Israel. About twenty years after, here it was
that Samuel set up the stone of help, and called it Ebenezer. And doth not
our God now sometimes, and not unfrequently, make that very spot
memorable where afflictions and soul-searching situations first begin? The
22

heavy slaughter in this battle of the army of Israel, by the uncircumcised
Philistines, loudly testified the Lord's displeasure at the sin of his people. The
Lord had said, that if they despised his statutes, and abhorred his judgments,
he would set his face against them, and they should he slain of their enemies;
and here we see it; Leviticus 26:15; Lev_26:17.
K&D, “1Sa_4:2
When the battle was fought, the Israelites were defeated by the Philistines, and in
battle-array four thousand men were smitten upon the field. ַ‫ר‬ָ‫,ע‬ sc., ‫ה‬ ָ‫מ‬ ָ‫ח‬ ְ‫ל‬ ִ‫,מ‬ as in
Jdg_20:20, Jdg_20:22, etc. ‫ה‬ָ‫כ‬ ָ‫ֲר‬‫ע‬ ַ‫מּ‬ ַ‫,בּ‬ in battle-array, i.e., upon the field of battle, not in
flight. “In the field,” i.e., the open field where the battle was fought.
3 When the soldiers returned to camp, the elders
of Israel asked, “Why did the Lord bring defeat
on us today before the Philistines? Let us bring
the ark of the Lord’s covenant from Shiloh, so
that he may go with us and save us from the hand
of our enemies.”
BARNES, "In the evening of the defeat of the Israelites the elders held a council, and
resolved to send for the ark, which is described in full, as implying that in virtue of the
covenant God could not but give them the victory (compare Num_10:35; Jos_3:10).
CLARKE, "Let us fetch the ark - They vainly supposed that the ark could save
them, when the God of it had departed from them because of their wickedness. They
knew that in former times their fathers had been beaten by their enemies, when they
took not the ark with them to battle; as in the case of their wars with the Canaanites,
Num_14:44, Num_14:45; and that they had conquered when they took this with them,
as in the case of the destruction of Jericho, Jos_6:4. From the latter clause they took
23

confidence; but the cause of their miscarriage in the former they laid not to heart. It was
customary with all the nations of the earth to take their gods and sacred ensigns with
them to war. The Persians, Indians, Greeks, Romans, Germans, Philistines, etc., did so.
Consecrated crosses, blessing and hallowing of colors and standards, are the modern
remains of those ancient superstitions.
GILL, "And when the people came into the camp,.... At Ebenezer, where they
pitched their tents, and from whence they went out to battle, and whither they returned
after their defeat:
the elders of Israel said, wherefore hath the Lord smitten us today before
the Philistines? they were right in ascribing it to the Lord, who had suffered them to
be defeated by their enemies, but it is strange they should be so insensible of the cause of
it; there was a reason ready at hand, their sins and iniquities were the cause of it, the
corruption of manners among them, their neglect of bringing their offerings to the Lord,
and the idolatry that many of them were guilty of, at least secretly, 1Sa_2:24 to punish
them for which, they were brought into this war, and smitten in it; and yet they wonder
at it, that so it should be, that they the people of God should be smitten before Heathens
and uncircumcised Philistines; and the rather, since they went to battle with them
according to the word of the Lord by Samuel; not considering that they went into this
war without humiliation for their sins, and without praying to God for success, and that
it was intended as a correction of them for their offences against God:
let us fetch the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of Shiloh unto us; in which
the law was, sometimes called the covenant between God and them; and which was a
symbol of the divine Presence, for want of which they supposed they had not the
presence of God with them, and so had not success; and the rather they were encouraged
to take this step and method, because that formerly Israel had success against their
enemies when the ark was with them, Num_31:6 though no doubt in this there was an
overruling providence of God, by which they were led to take such a step as this, in order
to bring the two sons of Eli into the camp, that they might be slain in one day, according
to the divine prediction:
that when it cometh among us, it may save us out of the hand of our
enemies; foolishly placing their confidence in an external symbol, and not in the Lord
himself; ascribing salvation to that, which only belongs to him, whether of a temporal or
spiritual kind: and such folly and vanity are men guilty of when they seek to, make use
of, and trust in anything short of Christ for salvation; as in carnal descent; in the rituals
of the law; in the ordinances of the Gospel; in any religious exercises, private or public;
or in any works of righteousness done by them: in Christ alone is salvation from spiritual
enemies; and indeed from the Lord only is salvation and deliverance from temporal
enemies.
HENRY 3-4, "III. The measures they concerted for another engagement. A council of
war was called, and, instead of resolving to fast and pray and amend their lives, so ill
taught were they (and no wonder when they had such teachers) that, 1. They quarrelled
with God for appearing against them (1Sa_4:3): Wherefore has the Lord smitten us? If
24

they meant this as an enquiry into the cause of God's displeasure, they needed not go far
to find that out. It was plain enough; Israel had sinned, though they were not willing to
see it and own it. But it rather seems that they expostulate boldly with God about it, are
displeased at what God has done, and dispute the matter with him. They own the hand
of God in their trouble (so far was right): “It is the Lord that has smitten us;” but,
instead of submitting to it, they quarrel with it, and speak as those that are angry at him
and his providence, and not aware of any just provocation they have given him:
“Wherefore shall we, that are Israelites, be smitten before the Philistines? How absurd
and unjust is it!” Note, The foolishness of man perverts his way, and then his heart frets
against the Lord (Pro_19:3) and finds fault with him. 2. They imagined that they could
oblige him to appear for them the next time by bringing the ark into their camp. The
elders of Israel were so ignorant and foolish as to make the proposal (1Sa_4:3), and the
people soon put it in execution, 1Sa_4:4. They sent to Shiloh for the ark, and Eli had not
courage enough to detain it, but sent his ungodly sons, Hophni and Phinehas, along with
it, at least permitted them to go, though he knew that wherever they went the curse of
God went along with them. Now see here, (1.) The profound veneration the people had
for the ark. “O send for that, and it will do wonders for us.” The ark was, by institution, a
visible token of God's presence. God had said that he would dwell between the cherubim,
which were over the ark and were carried along with it; now they thought that, by paying
a great respect to this sacred chest, they should prove themselves to be Israelites indeed,
and effectually engage God Almighty to appear in their favour. Note, It is common for
those that have estranged themselves from the vitals of religion to discover a great
fondness for the rituals and external observances of it, for those that even deny the
power of godliness not only to have, but to have in admiration, the form of it. The temple
of the Lord is cried up, and the ark of the Lord stickled for with a great deal of seeming
zeal by multitudes that have no regard at all for the Lord of the temple and the God of
the ark, as if a fiery concern for the name of Christianity would atone for a profane
contempt of the thing. And yet indeed they did but make an idol of the ark, and looked
upon it to be as much an image of the God of Israel as those idols which the heathen
worshipped were of their gods. To worship the true God, and not to worship him as God,
is in effect not to worship him at all. (2.) Their egregious folly in thinking that the ark, if
they had it in their camp, would certainly save them out of the hand of their enemies,
and bring victory back to their side. For, [1.] When the ark set forward Moses prayed,
Rise up, Lord, and let thy enemies be scattered, well knowing that it was not the ark
moving with them, but God appearing for them, that must give them success; and here
were no proper means used to engage God to favour them with his presence; what good
then would the ark do them, the shell without the kernel? [2.] They were so far from
having God's leave to remove his ark that he had plainly enough intimated to them in his
law that when they were settled in Canaan his ark should be settled in the place that he
should choose (Deu_12:5, Deu_12:11), and that they must come to it, not it to them.
How then could they expect any advantage by it when they had not a just and legal
possession of it, nor any warrant to remove it from its place? Instead of honouring God
by what they did, they really affronted him. Nay, [3.] If there had been nothing else to
invalidate their expectations from the ark, how could they expect it should bring a
blessing when Hophni and Phinehas were the men that carried it? It would have given
too much countenance to their villany if the ark had done any kindness to Israel while it
was in the hands of those graceless priests.
25

JAMISON, "Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of Shiloh
unto us — Strange that they were so blind to the real cause of the disaster and that they
did not discern, in the great and general corruption of religion and morals (1Sa_2:22-25;
1Sa_7:3; Psa_78:58), the reason why the presence and aid of God were not extended to
them. Their first measure for restoring the national spirit and energy ought to have been
a complete reformation - a universal return to purity of worship and morals. But, instead
of cherishing a spirit of deep humiliation and sincere repentance, instead of resolving on
the abolition of existing abuses, and the re-establishing of the pure faith, they adopted
what appeared an easier and speedier course - they put their trust in ceremonial
observances, and doubted not but that the introduction of the ark into the battlefield
would ensure their victory. In recommending this extraordinary step, the elders might
recollect the confidence it imparted to their ancestors (Num_10:35; Num_14:44), as
well as what had been done at Jericho. But it is more probable that they were influenced
by the heathenish ideas of their idolatrous neighbors, who carried their idol Dagon, or
his sacred symbols, to their wars, believing that the power of their divinities was
inseparably associated with, or residing in, their images. In short, the shout raised in the
Hebrew camp, on the arrival of the ark, indicated very plainly the prevalence among the
Israelites at this time of a belief in national deities - whose influence was local, and
whose interest was especially exerted in behalf of the people who adored them. The joy
of the Israelites was an emotion springing out of the same superstitious sentiments as
the corresponding dismay of their enemies; and to afford them a convincing, though
painful proof of their error, was the ulterior object of the discipline to which they were
now subjected - a discipline by which God, while punishing them for their apostasy by
allowing the capture of the ark, had another end in view - that of signally vindicating His
supremacy over all the gods of the nations.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 4:3-4. Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us? — This was
strange blindness, that when there was so great a corruption in their worship and
manners, they could not see sufficient reason why God should suffer them to fall by
their enemies. Let us fetch the ark — That great pledge of God’s presence and help,
by whose conduct our ancestors obtained success. Instead of humbling themselves
for, and purging themselves from their sins, for which God was displeased with
them, they take an easier and cheaper course, and put their trust in their ceremonial
observances, not doubting but the very presence of the ark would give them the
victory. That they might bring the ark — This they should not have done without
asking counsel of God.
COKE, "1 Samuel 4:3. Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us to-day— The Israelites
seem not only to have undertaken this war without consulting God, but to have
vainly thought that, as being His people, they must necessarily be crowned with
success; and in this vain confidence, they send for the ark of the covenant; not
considering, that there could be little hope of God's assistance while they lived in
notorious disobedience to his laws.
26

ELLICOTT, " (3) Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us?—The people and the elders
who, as we have seen above, had undertaken the war of liberty at the instigation or
the young man of God, amazed at their defeat, were puzzled to understand why God
was evidently not in their midst; they showed by their next procedure how
thoroughly they had gone astray from the old pure religion.
Let us fetch the ark of the covenant.—Whether or not Samuel acquiesced in this
fatal proposition we have no information. It evidently did not emanate from him.
but, as we are expressly told, from the “elders of the people.” Probably the lesson of
the first defeat had deeply impressed him, and he saw that a thorough reformation
throughout the land was needed before the invisible King would again be present
among the people.
It may save us.—It was a curious delusion, this baseless hope of the elders, that the
unseen God was inseparably connected with that strange and beautiful symbol of
His presence, with that coffer of perishable wood and metal overshadowed by the
lifeless golden angels carved on the shining seat which closed this sacred Ark—that
glittering mercy seat, as it was called, round which so many hallowed memories of
the glory vision had gathered. Far on in the people’s story, one of the greatest of
Samuel’s successors, Jeremiah, presses home the same truth the people were so slow
in learning, when he passionately urges his Israel, “Trust ye not in lying words,
saying The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord are
these. For if ye thoroughly amend your ways and your doings, then will I cause you
to dwell in this place, in the land that 1 gave to your fathers, for ever and ever”
(Jeremiah 7:4-5; Jeremiah 7:7).
Wordsworth here, with great force, thus writes:—“Probably David remembered
this history when, with a clearer faith, he refused to allow the Ark to be carried with
him in his retreat before Absalom out of Jerusalem; and even when the priests had
brought it forth, he commanded them to carry it back to its place, saying, ‘If I shall
find favour in the eyes of the Lord, He will bring me again, and show me both it and
His habitation.’ (2 Samuel 15:25.)
“David, without the Ark visibly present, but with the unseen help of Him who was
27

enthroned on the mercy-seat, triumphed, and was restored to Jerusalem; but Israel,
with the Ark visibly present, but without the blessing of Him whose throne the Ark
was, fell before their enemies, and were deprived of the sacred symbol, which was
taken by the Philistines.”
HAWKER, "(3) And when the people were come into the camp, the elders of Israel
said, Wherefore hath the LORD smitten us today before the Philistines? Let us fetch
the ark of the covenant of the LORD out of Shiloh unto us, that, when it cometh
among us, it may save us out of the hand of our enemies.
What an awful character is man, void of the teachings of divine grace! Had Israel
been humbled under the mighty hand of God, and had the elders of Israel, with
prayer and supplication, consulted the ark of God, instead of presumptuously
bringing the ark out of the sacred spot where God had appointed it to be placed, all
might have been well. But by this daring act, unauthorized of God, and as it should
almost seem, in defiance, (from the expression, wherefore hath the Lord smitten
us?) they evidently manifested that punishment, instead of humbling, had hardened
their minds. Reader! if under divine visitations, instead of flying to Jesus, we take
up with the mere profession of the religion of Jesus, and trust in the form of
Godliness, void of the power of it; wherein do we differ from them?
LANGE, " 1 Samuel 4:3. After the return to the camp, it is assumed as a fact in the
ensuing deliberation of the elders, that God had smitten them before the Philistines,
and the cause is discussed. The whole people here appears as a unit, which is
represented by the elders.—The ark here spoken of is no other than the Mosaic, the
symbol of God’s presence with His people, the place of His revelation to them. Cf.
Exodus 25:16-22. When the Israelites say: “ We will fetch the ark of the Lord out of
Shiloh unto us, and it shall come into our midst and save us from our enemies,” they
assume that the Lord and the ark are inseparably connected, and that they can
obtain His help against the foe, (of which they recognize their need), only by taking
the ark along with them into battle. They connected the expected help essentially
with the material vessel, instead of bowing in living, pure faith before the Lord, of
whose revealing presence it was only a symbol, and crying to Him for His help. This
is a heathenish feature in the religious life of the Israelites, and shows that their
faith was obscured by superstition, there being no trace here of earnest self-
examination with the question whether the cause of the defeat might not lie in God’s
holiness and justice thus revealing itself against their sins. Grotius therefore well
remarks: “ It is in vain that they trust in God, when they are not purged from their
28

sins.”
PULPIT, "1 Samuel 4:3
When the people were come into the camp. Before the battle Israel had entrenched
itself, so that upon its defeat it had a place capable of defence into which to retire.
We find also that their communications were open, so that they could send to
Shiloh. The army is called the people because battles were not fought in those days
by men specially trained, but by all the inhabitants of the country of the proper age.
The question, Wherefore hath Jehovah smitten us? expresses surprise. The elders
had evidently expected victory, and therefore the domination of the Philistines could
not have been so complete as it certainly was in the days of Samson. There must
have been an intermediate period of successful warfare during which Eli had been
their leader. Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of Jehovah. This, the remedy
suggested by the elders, was to employ their God as a talisman or charm. The ark
was the symbol of Jehovah's presence among them, and of their being his especial
people, and by exposing it to danger they supposed that they would compel their
God to interfere in their behalf. They would have done right in appealing to their
covenant relation to Jehovah; and had they repented of the sins which had grown
up among them, fostered by the evil example of Eli's sons, he would have shown
them mercy. But for God to have given Israel the victory because of the presence of
his ark in their camp would have been to overthrow all moral government, and
would have insured their spiritual ruin as inevitably as would the granting to any
order of men now the power of working miracles or of infallibly declaring the truth.
K&D, “On the return of the people to the camp, the elders held a council of war as to
the cause of the defeat they had suffered. “Why hath Jehovah smitten us to-day before
the Philistines?” As they had entered upon the war by the word and advice of Samuel,
they were convinced that Jehovah had smitten them. The question presupposes at the
same time that the Israelites felt strong enough to enter upon the war with their
enemies, and that the reason for their defeat could only be that the Lord, their covenant
God, had withdrawn His help. This was no doubt a correct conclusion; but the means
which they adopted to secure the help of their God in continuing the war were altogether
wrong. Instead of feeling remorse and seeking the help of the Lord their God by a sincere
repentance and confession of their apostasy from Him, they resolved to fetch the ark of
the covenant out of the tabernacle at Shiloh into the camp, with the delusive idea that
God had so inseparably bound up His gracious presence in the midst of His people with
this holy ark, which He had selected as the throne of His gracious appearance, that He
would of necessity come with it into the camp and smite the foe. In 1Sa_4:4, the ark is
called “the ark of the covenant of Jehovah of hosts, who is enthroned above the
cherubim,” partly to show the reason why the people had the ark fetched, and partly to
indicate the hope which they founded upon the presence of this sacred object. (See the
commentary on Exo_25:20-22). The remark introduced here, “and the two sons of Eli
were there with the ark of the covenant of God,” is not merely intended to show who the
guardians of the ark were, viz., priests who had hitherto disgraced the sanctuary, but
29

also to point forward at the very outset to the result of the measures adopted.
BI, “Wherefore hath the Lord smitten us today before the Philistines?
The advantages of defeat
This cry of amazement stands between two defeats. Defeat astounded Israel: it fell in
despite of priests and religious parade. We should study defeats. Personal and corporate
both. Army cadets at Sandhurst and Woolwich prepare to achieve victory by the study of
military failures. Good will come of such study in spite of its sadness.
I. Defeat that compels enquiry into our moral discipline is good.
1. Defeat comes as a surprise. We are in the hosts of the Great King. We have been
educated to expect victory. Our base, our supplies, our alliances, our history, have
led to this.
2. We should be grateful to the first questioner in the Church, who demands
research into the Church’s character. “Wherefore?” is the prelude of “Hallelujah.” So,
too, in the life of the soul.
3. Enquiry will demonstrate the omission of some condition essential to success. A
little later (1Sa_7:8) Samuel explains the double disaster. Our “Leader and
Commander” has not promised unconditional triumph. “The promises are made to
character.” “If ye do return unto the Lord . . . He will deliver you.”
4. Each day may be with us a day of battle.
II. It is no small gain when we see defeat to be the fruit of past neglect.
1. Had Israel been true long before, there would have been no Philistines now to vex
and humiliate them. At the conquest of Canaan they had their chance. But fatigue set
in, and enthusiasm faded away before the conquest could be completed. Awed and
crippled remnants of heathen nations were left. Jebusites in Mount Zion, Philistines
on the southwest border. They were the seed of future miseries and shames to Israel.
2. To every Christian there comes a time of special power and possibility. By laying
hold on God’s strength it would be easy then to slay our native foes, our inbred sins.
Conversion should bring us more than pardon. It should bring the mastery of sin.
Too often, the forgiven soul carries into the Christian life sins which, though
crippled, are by no means dead. Rightly taught, we should seek their extermination.
III. It is an advantage when defeat proves the worthlessness of superstition.
1. Some sacral warrior, looking on the field with its 4,000 slain, cried, “Let us fetch
the Ark . . . that it may save us.” Superstition added to sin does not improve the
position. Israel called for the Ark, instead of for the God of the Ark and of the nation.
2. High regard for the Ark was natural. Read its history. It was made on a Divine
plan; and housed in the Holy of holies; it was the resting place of the Shekinah. By
grand histories it had taken a deep place in their reverence and love. Here lay the
danger. It is easy to cling to the visible loved symbol, whilst the invisible world of
truth for which it stands is “let slip.” We may carry to life’s battlefields all our
religious methods, and fail in the fight. Faith in God would have purified their hearts
(Act_15:9) and made them heroes in the fight. The historian Napier, speaking of our
army in Spain, said, “Incalculable is the preponderance of moral power in war.”
30

Superstition may be described as moral faith lowered from the living God to things.
It is incapable of faith’s valiant movements. It has no grip of God.
3. Superstition shows itself in the Christian congregation. A modern form of it is
Ecclesiolatry. The Church is unspeakably great, sacred, and dear. And it is not
difficult to set it in the soul’s faith and love as a rival to God.
IV. It is a gain when defeat removes unworthy leaders. The peril of Israel lay as much in
their leaders’ unworthiness as in their own vices. The nation was like a drifting ship.
With men of high character at the helm she might have recovered leeway. But of her
steersmen two were drunk with iniquity, and one lacked energy to the point of
criminality. It was necessary to get rid of these helmsmen if the ship’s company was to
be saved. First, Hophni and Phinehas were slain (1Sa_4:11). Next, Eli fell. With the death
of these men a new era opens—the epoch of Samuel. Storms shake rotten wood from
living trees to make way for fresh and healthy development.
V. Though defeated, we may win on the same site ere long. The battles were fought at
Ebenezer (1Sa_4:1). Here the armies met again soon (1Sa_7:12). Then victory sat on the
banners of Israel. It was a day of praise and monument raising. We improve our record
of deeds done when we improve our character. (1Sa_7:2; 1Sa_7:4.) Let no man lose
heart. Rather let him seek victory through repentance and faith in God alone. Defeat is
not God’s design for us. “Thanks be to God which always causeth us to triumph in
Christ.” (James Dunk.)
Let us fetch the ark . . . that when it cometh among us it may save us.
(Compare with 1Sa_4:10, and 1Sa_7:3.)—
Superstition and religion
“Let us fetch the ark.” What was the ark? It was a chest made of wood. It was overlaid
with pure gold, within and without, and crowned with a mercy seat of pure gold. What
was its purpose? It was a material thing representing a spiritual idea. It was a thing
made with hands to symbolise things not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. It
was a temporality pointing to a spirituality. That is how humanity deals with unseen
presences; it makes visible vestures for them, garments that can be touched. Here are
ten thousand men, a nation’s army, moving with one step, to one music, on one mission.
They are possessed by one sentiment, that of patriotism; they are swayed by one idea,
that of freedom. But these sentiments and ideas are intangible, spiritual, unseen. The
nation must give them visibility; they must become enshrined in vestures that can be
handled and seen. So we give our army a flag, and a flag which cam be touched
represents the unseen which cannot be couched; it represents patriotic sentiment,
national enthusiasm, the common hope. Through that flag there gleams the idea of duty
and of right. To abuse the flag is to insult the nation. The ermine which our judges wear
is the symbol of an idea. That visible robe represents the unseen vesture of authority
with which their fellow men have clothed them. All these are visible representatives of
unseen forces and powers. Our very instinct leads us to give these unseen presences a
local and visible habitation and name. And here was God, an unseen Power, and men
hungered for some material symbol to represent the unseen and eternal. And God said:
“Make an ark of wood and gold,” and it shall stand as the symbol of the meeting of God
and man, the confluence of time and eternity, the blending of the unseen influences of
heaven with the unseen aspirations of earth. Now the character of symbols depends
31

upon the character of man as men become better, symbols become enriched. As men
deteriorate symbols become degraded. Is that not so with the commonest of all
symbolism which we call language? These words which I am now addressing to you are
all symbols which I am using to represent my unseen thought. The corruption of
language follows the degradation of man. Language loses significance; it becomes
debased, and its deterioration must be traced to its essential cause in the deterioration of
man. It is the same with other symbols besides language. They become emptied of their
royal significance when men lose their royalty. The more high-minded is the soldier, the
more illustrious is his flag; the more debased is the soldier, the more vulgar is the flag.
And so symbols wait upon character, they can become gradually impoverished in their
meaning, until at length they become as empty as those shells which are strewn in
myriads along our shores, empty houses which have lost their tenants, forsaken and
lifeless forms. But now, mark you, a strange foible and trick of human nature. When our
feelings and enthusiasms have deteriorated, and the symbols have lost their life, we are
prone to hug the empty shell, and we delude ourselves into the belief that the empty
symbol can do what only could be done by its living guest. Thoroughly bad men wear a
crucifix, an empty shell, a cross without a Saviour. One of the most notorious criminals
of our time was found with a crucifix next to his skin. Now let us realise their position.
They had lost the purity of their character, and they tried to pervert a religious
symbolism into unreligious magic. They thought that a dead symbol would do the work
of a living devotion, and that is superstition. It would be just as reasonable for a man
who was being drawn headlong to ruin by drink to seek end save himself by putting on a
blue ribbon, a symbol of sobriety, and yet to continue to grovel in the waste and slough
of passion and lust. For bad men to send for the ark to protect them is evidence that
their religion has degraded them into the grossest superstition. There are homes in
which Bibles are kept, not to be read, but because their presence is supposed to
surround the home with a certain sanctity and protection. But are we not prone to use
these symbols and means as the Israelites used their ark, to obtain a sort of magical
protection from physical peril, and not deliverance from the captivity of sin? And is not
the divine purpose of prayer sometimes forgotten, and is it not often employed as a spell
to save us from poverty and loss of danger, but not from sin? There is a short paragraph
in the life of one of the saintliest men of our time which I will read to you, as it specially
illustrates my argument. In one of his letters, written in manhood, he writes: “Once I
recollect I was taken up with nine other boys at school to be punished, and I prayed to
escape the shame. The master, previous to flogging all the others, said to me, to the great
bewilderment of the whole school: ‘Little boy, I excuse you, I have particular reasons for
it.’ That incident settled my mind for a long time; only I doubt whether it did me any
good, for prayer became a charm. I knew I carried about a talisman—which would save
me from all harm. It did not make me better, it simply gave me security.” Will you mark
that last phrase? “It did not make me better; it simply gave me security.” That was what
the ark did for the Philistines; is that all that prayer does for us—composing our fears
but not affecting our morals, giving us a sense of security, but not delivering us from our
sin? If the exercise has been thus debased, it will betray us when we need it most; refuge
will fail us when we stand at last in the presence of the pure and holy God. (J. H.
Jowett.)
A superstitious and religious use of sacred things
(1Ch_13:14):—In the first text the children of Israel say, “Let us fetch the ark of the
32

covenant out of Shiloh unto us.” The bringing of the ark then from Shiloh was a free and
spontaneous act on their part. They had a purpose in sending for it—to save them out of
the hand of their enemies. Remembering what had been done at Jordan and at Jericho
through the instrumentality of the ark, they were satisfied that by having it with them
they would be able to triumph over their foes. Consequently, on its being brought into
the camp there was great joy on the part of the Israelites (1Sa_4:5) and great
consternation among the Philistines (1Sa_4:6-7). The Israelites were disappointed in
their expectations, for they, instead of being victorious, were defeated with great
slaughter (1Sa_4:10-11). From the second text we learn that the ark came into the house
of Obed-edom more by accident than anything else. He did not send for it; he did not
express a wish to have it; and he had not even the expectation of its ever being brought
into his house. These incidents, when placed side by side, are very instructive. The
Israelites sent for the ark, and took it with them to battle, but for all that they lost the
day. Obed-edom did not send for the ark, but only received it into his house, and the
Lord blessed his family and all that he had. To the Israelites, who sent for it, the ark
became a savour of death unto death; but to Obed-edom, who received it into his house,
the same ark became a savour of life unto life. In the one case the ark was a snare, and in
the other a blessing.
I. The superstitious use of sacred things. On the part of an irreligious man there is a
tendency, when in sore straits, to betake himself, not to God, but to reading the Bible, or
to what he calls prayer, in the hope that by “sending for the ark” his difficulties will be
removed. And on the part of all there is a danger of our looking upon things sacred as
charms, and therefore of contenting ourselves with keeping the Sabbath, reading the
Bible, going to church, partaking of the sacrament, as if some special virtue was of
necessity connected with the simple discharge of these duties. They are useful and
profitable as means, but it is only in that light that they can profit anyone.
II. The religious use of sacred things. Respecting Obed-edom very little is known, but we
are warranted in believing that he was a good man. He reverenced the ark not for its own
sake, but as the token of God’s presence, and he was therefore blessed in his house and
all that he had. His conduct suggests the profitableness of religion at home,
1. It is necessary to observe the word that is employed. It is not said that he was
enriched, that he was made a prosperous man, or that he was raised above
difficulties or trials. He was blessed.
2. He was blessed in his house, in his own person, in his family, in his dependents.
3. He was blessed in all that he had. He may have had burdens, he may have had
trials, but he was blessed in his business, in his joy, in his sorrows. (P. Robertson, A.
M.)
The form and spirit of religion
As is man, such must his religion be. Now, man is a compound being. To speak correctly,
man is a spiritual being: he hath within him a soul, a substance far beyond the bounds of
matter. But man is also made up of a body as well as a soul. He is not pure spirit, his
spirit is incarnate in flesh and blood. Now, such is our religion. The religion of God is, as
to its vitality, purely spiritual—always so; but since man is made of flesh as well as of
spirit, it seemed necessary that his religion should have something of the outward,
33

external, and material, in which to embody the spiritual, or else man would not have
been able to lay hold upon it. Our religion, then, has an outward form even to this day;
for the apostle Paul, when he spoke of professing Christians, spoke of some who had “a
form of godliness, but denied the power thereof.” So that it is still true, though I confess
not to the same extent as it was in the days of Moses, that religion must have a body, that
the spiritual thing may come out palpably before our vision, and that we may see it.
I. In the first place then, the form of religion is to be reverently observed. This ark of the
covenant was with the Jews the most sacred instrument of their religion. And, indeed,
they had great reason in the days of Samuel to reverence this ark, for you will recollect
that when Moses went to war with the Midianites, a great slaughter of that people was
occasioned by the fact that Eleazar, the high priest, with a silver trumpet, stood in the
forefront of the battle, bearing in his hands the holy instrument of the law—that is, the
ark; and it was by the presence of this ark that the victory was achieved. It was by this
ark, too, that the river Jordan was dried up. And when they had landed in the promised
country, you remember it was by this ark that the walls of Jericho fell flat to the ground.
These people, therefore, thought if they could once get the ark, it would be all right, and
they would be sure to triumph; and, while I shall have in the second head, to insist upon
it that they were wrong in superstitiously imputing strength to the poor chest, yet the ark
was to be reverently observed, for it was the outward symbol of a high spiritual truth,
and it was never to be treated with any indignity.
1. It is quite certain, in the first place, that the form of religion must never be altered.
You remember that this ark was made by Moses, according to the pattern that God
had given him in the mount. Now, the outward forms of our religion, if they be
correct, are made by God. His two great ordinances of Baptism and the Lord’s
Supper are sent for us from on high. I dare not alter either of them.
2. And as the form must not be altered, so it must not be despised. These Philistines
despised the ark. To laugh at the Sabbath, to despise the ordinances of God’s House,
to neglect the means of grace, to call the outward form of religion a vain thing—all
this is highly offensive in the sight of God He will have us remember that while the
form is not the life, yet the form is to be respected for the sake of the life which it
contains; the body is to be venerated for the sake of the inward soul; and, as I would
have no man maim my body, even though in maiming it he might not be able to
wound my soul, so God would have no man maim the outward parts of religion,
although it is true no man can touch the real vitality of it.
3. As the outward form is neither to be altered nor despised, so neither is to be
intruded upon by unworthy persons. The Bethshemites had no intention whatever of
dishonouring the ark They had a vain curiosity to look within, and the sight of these
marvellous tables of stone struck them with death; for the law, when it is not covered
by the mercy seat, is death to any man, and it was death to them. Now, you will easily
remember how very solemn a penalty is attached to any man’s intruding into the
outward form of religion when he is not called to do so. Let me quote this awful
passage: “He” (speaking of the Lord’s Supper) “that eateth and drinketh unworthily
eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.”
4. And now, let me remark, that the outward things of God are to be diligently cared
for and loved.
II. Now, it is a notorious fact, that the very men who have the least idea of what spiritual
religion is are the men who pay the most superstitious attention to outward forms. We
34

refer you again to this instance. These people would neither repent, nor pray, nor seek
God and his prophets; yet they sought out this ark and trusted in it with superstitious
veneration. Now, in every country where there has been any religion at all that is true,
the great fact has come out very plainly, that the people who don’t know anything about
true religion, have always been the most careful about the forms.
III. And now, in the last place, it is mine to warn you that to trust in ceremonies is a
most deceitful thing and will end in the most terrific consequences. When these people
had got the ark into the camp, they shouted for joy, because they thought themselves
quite safe; but, alas, they met with a greater defeat than before. Only four thousand men
had been killed in the first battle, but in the second, thirty thousand footmen of Israel
fell down dead. How vain are the hopes that men build upon their good works, and
ceremonial observances! But there is one thing I want you to notice, and that is, that this
ark not only could not give victory to Israel, but it could not preserve the lives of the
priests themselves who carried it. This is a fetal blow to all who trust in the forms of
religion. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Regard for the Ark of God
I. ‘Tis so natural for men to claim the divine favour, in spite of their impieties; and when
they disgrace the sanctuary, to rely upon the outward advantages and immunities of it.
And ‘tis to be feared the case is too much our own, to be confident of God’s defence when
we renounce Him in our lives, and to boast of the purity of our religion when we shelter
our vices under it. Upon this calamity what counsel do the Israelites agree upon? Is there
a solemn day of humiliation appointed by them? Do they resort to the Tabernacle of the
Lord with tears and supplications? Do they bewail their own iniquities, and those of
their forefathers? It was madness in them to presume that God would be their
champion, as long as they retained their vices.
II. We know what mighty veneration was paid to the ark by God’s express institution;
and that He gave it to His people to distinguish them from the idolatrous world, both by
a token of His extraordinary tuition, and by reserving them to Himself as a peculiar
treasure.
III. To return then to the Ark, and Eli’s passionate concern for it, let us consider the
grounds and reasonableness of it:
1. With reference to the dignity of the Ark; and,
2. With regard to the danger of it.
(1) I begin with the first excellency of the Ark, as it was the symbol of God’s
Presence. “There I will meet with thee” (Exo_25:22). This then is the consequent
thereof, That God blesses and defends a people with whom He dwells: And
supposing the world to be governed by His Providence, we must acknowledge the
necessity of His protection to succeed in any enterprise. To this purpose I shall
argue upon two heads:
(1) That we may be secure in God;
(2) That we can be so in nothing else.
(1) That we may be secure in God, may appear upon three undeniable grounds;
35

that no counsel can prosper in opposition to His wisdom; that no resistance can
be made to His infinite power; and, that nothing can happen to us without His
determination. From these considerations it may be seen how dismal a calamity
it is to loss the protection of God; and how safe a nation is under this refuge, and
this alone Let us compare it with the imbecility and deceitfulness of all human
supports; none of which can bear the weight of our confidence, or justify our
reliance upon them; and much less exclusively to God.
(2) Having thus considered the Ark, as it was the authentic token of God’s
Presence; let us regard it, as it was the centre of the true religion: for thither the
sacrifices were commanded, and the prayers of the congregation went constantly
along with them; and to worship before it was in the sacred style to appear before
the Lord.
For the plainer view of that assertion we may briefly consider three things.
(1) That religion is the greatest improvement of human nature, and does more
distinguish it than all the endowments of reason: and that which raiseth the
dignity of a man, and gives him the most honourable character, must in
proportion increase the lustre of a community.
(2) Religion doth by a natural tendency promote the temporal peace and
prosperity of a nation.
(3) Religion doth by a moral efficacy make a people happy, in that it engageth
God to favour and protect them; His Presence goes along with the Ark of His
testimony; and they that serve Him faithfully, have an especial title to the
guardianship of His Almighty goodness.
(3) Supposing then, that pure religion is the greatest blessing of mankind, as
united into public bodies, what more naturally follows from hence, than that
good men ought to be affected as Eli was, and to be most warmly concerned for
the Ark of God?
I shall briefly subjoin four reasons:
(1) Because the honour of God is dearer to them than anything else.
(2) Because nothing is more valuable to good men than what they expect in a
better world; and desiring charitably for others what they justly prize for
themselves, they consequently make religion their leading care.
(3) Another reason of concern for the Ark may be this, because God’s protection
is removed from a people together with His presence: and hereupon, in the
prophetic vision, the glory of the Lord departed out of Jerusalem, to presignify
the destruction of it. Wherefore, if God departs from a land, nothing but
darkness and desolation can follow: and religion is the only way of retaining Him.
2. This brings me to a prospect of the Ark, namely, as it may be in danger by the sins
of those who are in possession of it: and so it actually went into captivity, when the
heart of good Eli was trembling for it.
(1) This judgment of God’s removing Himself, and His Ark, is sometimes
inflicted for national impenitence, when God hath long waited in vain for
repentance of public sins.
36

(2) Another cause of God’s removing His Ark, is the contempt of Divine truth,
and the undervaluing of revealed religion, and of the Holy Scriptures. And when
we treat them with scorn and niceness, or with sceptical pride and curiosity. No
monarch will endure the despising of his royal proclamations: and we cannot
think that God is less jealous for His holy word. The Tables of the Law were kept
in the Ark, to intimate what value God was pleased to stamp upon them.
(3) A cause of God’s withdrawing Himself and His Ark from a people, is the
profaning of His worship: and this was the flagrant enormity which make it a
spoil to the enemies of God under Eli’s administration.
(4) Divisions and contentions about religion are another cause of desolation to
it.
(5) Lastly, the abuse of the means of salvation, and unfruitfulness under them,
doth often provoke God to withdraw them. And ‘tis what our Lord threatens to
His own people, the kingdom of God (that is, the Gospel, with the rich privileges
of it) shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits
thereof.
IV. And now to conclude with some inferences from what has been said.
1. Considering how necessary to us God’s protection is, let us secure it as well as we
can, and be careful not to unqualify ourselves for it. What the sins are that are most
obstructive to our public peace, it is the business of the day to enquire impartially;
and to dispossess them by prayer and fasting.
2. Considering that the great felicity of a nation is to have the true religion
established in it, let us put a grateful value upon the communion of our Church; and
bless God for the inestimable advantages of it; and improve them so well as to
procure the continual preservation of them.
3. Considering how we ought to tremble in all the perils of the Ark, let us implore the
Divine grace, that we may seriously lay to heart the great dangers we are in by our
unhappy divisions; and let us ask our own consciences whether we have not deserved
that God should take sway His gospel from us?
4. Let it be considered, that though we could be certain of having the Ark of God
always with us; yet we should not be nearer to Him, nor to everlasting bliss, unless
our adorations towards it were pure, and our lives answerable thereunto. And let us
thus maintain the credit of our Church, and when the lustre of it will not be impaired
by any eclipse. We think our religion is the best in the world; and if it be so, let not
those that have a worse outstrip us in any virtue: let us strive to excel them in zeal
and integrity, in peacefulness and moderation, in probity and temperance. (Z.
Isham, D. D.)
The Ark of God in the camp
Two great lessons were taught the Israelites by God’s revelation and dealings, viz., the
peril of irreverence, the peril of superstition.
I. Professing Christians, when contending with their spiritual foes, are tempted like
Israel to take refuge in superstition, to put the form for the reality. For instance,
37

1. Mistaken view of sacraments. Reception of sick and dying regarded as a guarantee
of safety.
2. Mistaken use of the Bible. Supposed virtue in the bare reading of a chapter. Like
Pharisees of our Lord’s days, or Saul of Tarsus before conversion.
3. Mistaken view as to use of certain religious language—a “shibboleth.” These may
be all either means or signs of grace, and may be full of blessing; but in themselves
they are profitless, like the ark without God’s presence.
II. Professing Christians, trusting to such expedients, meet with disastrous failure.
1. What did the ark contain? The tables of the law, which only condemned. These
ungodly men only proclaimed their own condemnation. The law cannot save.
2. What gave it its special holiness? The presence of the Sheckinah on the mercy
seat; God manifesting Himself in atonement of sin. When this was absent, the ark
could not save, any more than the temple saved Jerusalem from her foes.
III. Professing Christians should learn herefrom some important lessons.
1. God values the substance more than the shadow, the reality more than the form.
He will even sacrifice His own ark rather than let it conduce to superstition.
2. God rejects superstitious worship, and requires the heart and sincerity.
3. The presence on the mercy seat alone gives strength for conflict or peace in
trouble. (Homilist.)
The Ark of God
1. Learn that the formal is useless without the spiritual. There is the ark, made as
God dictated—a sacred thing: the law is there; the mercy seat is there. Yet Israel falls
by the arms of the Philistines, and the sacred shrine is taken by the hands of the
idolaters. The formal never can save men; the institutional never can redeem society.
This is, emphatically, the day of bringing in arks, societies, formalities, ceremonies.
You have in your house an altar; that altar will be nothing influential in your life if
you have it there merely for the sake of formality.
2. Learn that religion is not to be a mere convenience. The ark is not to be used as a
magical spell. Holy things are not to be run to in extremity, and set up in order that
men who are in peril may be saved. “That it may save us.” That sounds like a modern
expression! To be personally saved, to be delivered out of a pressing emergency or
strait—that seems to be the one object which many people have in view when
identifying themselves with religious institutions, Christian observances and
fellowships. We must not play with our religion. We might guarantee that every place
of worship would be filled at five o’clock in the morning and at twelve o’clock at night
under given circumstances. Let there be a plague in the city—let men’s hearts fail
them with fear—and they will instantly flock to churches and chapels. That will not
do! God is not to be moved by incantations, by decent formalities, and external
reverence. He will answer the continuous cry of the life.
3. We learn that the Philistines took the ark of the covenant. But though they had
captured the ark, that sacred shrine made itself terribly felt. (J. Parker, D. D.)
38

1 samuel 4 commentary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (12)

Similar to 1 samuel 4 commentary

Similar to 1 samuel 4 commentary (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

1 samuel 4 commentary